Author Topic: A Rabbit Trail  (Read 5266 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
A Rabbit Trail
« on: May 09, 2016, 08:43:42 PM »
Wgw was posting in another thread about a pastor who was speculating from the pulpit whether Christ was married, and said that this was evidence of the pastor's heresy.

That made me wonder something. We know that Christ didn't marry, but was the fact that He remained single essential to our salvation, or merely accidental? Meaning, if He had gotten married, could we have still been saved? Or did He actually need to remain single in order to accomplish His work? Has anyone commented on this?

Knowing the answer to the question might be helpful in determining whether speculations about Christ's marital status are actually heretical, or merely incorrect theologoumena.
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline Vladislav

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of Yekaterinburg
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2016, 02:10:36 PM »
Hi dear brother and thanx for the interesting question.
You wrote
We know that Christ didn't marry

To me, it sounds wrong. In the Bible, we can certainly see Jesus is married. For instance, please see Gen 2:21-24, Matt 22:2, John 3:29, 1 Cor 15:45, Eph 5:29-32, and especially Rev 19:7 and Rev 21:9.
Of course, His beloved wife is His Church.
And just like with the first Adam, God made the wife for the second One from His rib. When He fell asleep deeply, on the cross. See John 19:34.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 02:42:43 PM by Vladislav »

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2016, 02:43:18 PM »
Wgw was posting in another thread about a pastor who was speculating from the pulpit whether Christ was married, and said that this was evidence of the pastor's heresy.

That made me wonder something. We know that Christ didn't marry, but was the fact that He remained single essential to our salvation, or merely accidental? Meaning, if He had gotten married, could we have still been saved? Or did He actually need to remain single in order to accomplish His work? Has anyone commented on this?

Knowing the answer to the question might be helpful in determining whether speculations about Christ's marital status are actually heretical, or merely incorrect theologoumena.

I've asked a few people this question, before (including an Evangelical who has no notion of monasticism or celibacy), and the answer I've gotten has always been the following: A look of shock, confusion, and anger followed by "Jesus was never married!"
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2016, 03:15:31 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 03:15:58 PM by HaydenTE »
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2016, 03:17:54 PM »
God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality.

Interesting...
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2016, 03:21:04 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2016, 04:07:35 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2016, 04:13:22 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2016, 04:24:07 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Volnutt is probably thinking of this less in terms of biology and more in terms of the abuse and trauma inherent in sexual relations with someone subject to one's authority. 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2016, 04:25:52 PM »
Mor's right.
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #10 on: May 12, 2016, 04:31:44 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Volnutt is probably thinking of this less in terms of biology and more in terms of the abuse and trauma inherent in sexual relations with someone subject to one's authority.

As opposed to impregnating someone subject to one's authority?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #11 on: May 12, 2016, 04:37:38 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Volnutt is probably thinking of this less in terms of biology and more in terms of the abuse and trauma inherent in sexual relations with someone subject to one's authority.

As opposed to impregnating someone subject to one's authority?

I guess you're right...
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,594
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #12 on: May 12, 2016, 04:40:27 PM »
He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself
What if some measure of yearning is more excellent than being completely satisfied?
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #13 on: May 12, 2016, 04:50:46 PM »
He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself
What if some measure of yearning is more excellent than being completely satisfied?
Maybe for people, but not for God.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #14 on: May 12, 2016, 04:52:02 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #15 on: May 12, 2016, 04:55:13 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,594
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #16 on: May 12, 2016, 04:56:04 PM »
He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself
What if some measure of yearning is more excellent than being completely satisfied?
Maybe for people, but not for God.
Why?
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,588
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #17 on: May 12, 2016, 05:17:36 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

I think it was Nick who was recently lamenting that many posters in the Orthodox.net seem to think that acknowledging that Christ had human features beyond being physically having a body is somehow denying the wholeness of his divinity.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 05:19:07 PM by Agabus »
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #18 on: May 12, 2016, 05:24:11 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 05:28:25 PM by HaydenTE »
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,226
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #19 on: May 12, 2016, 05:35:26 PM »
Jesus want whoever is singing this song.  Case closed.

Quote

I come to the garden alone
While the dew is still on the roses
And the voice I hear, falling on my ear
The Son of God discloses

(Chorus)
And He walks with me
And He talks with me
And He tells me I am His own
And the joy we share as we tarry there
None other has ever known

He speaks and the sound of His voice
Is so sweet the birds hush their singing
And the melody that He gave to me
Within my heart is ringing

I'd stay in the garden with Him
'Tho the night around me be falling
But He bids me go; through the voice of woe
His voice to me is calling

http://christiansongslyrics.blogspot.com/2012/04/he-walks-with-me-by-anne-murray.html
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

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

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

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,588
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #20 on: May 12, 2016, 06:06:46 PM »
Jesus want whoever is singing this song.  Case closed.


The original Mary Magdala was Jesus' homegirl hit.
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #21 on: May 12, 2016, 06:34:32 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Volnutt is probably thinking of this less in terms of biology and more in terms of the abuse and trauma inherent in sexual relations with someone subject to one's authority.

As opposed to impregnating someone subject to one's authority?

It's not my argument, merely a recognition that the social justice crusading around here has become just a little too predictable. 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,898
  • Excelsior
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #22 on: May 12, 2016, 07:45:50 PM »
Jesus want whoever is singing this song.  Case closed.


The original Mary Magdala was Jesus' homegirl hit.

What?
My only weakness is, well, never mind

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #23 on: May 12, 2016, 10:35:45 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

I think it was Nick who was recently lamenting that many posters in the Orthodox.net seem to think that acknowledging that Christ had human features beyond being physically having a body is somehow denying the wholeness of his divinity.


Yeah.....I blame Plato.  Maybe the Greek part of "Greek Orthodox Church" actually is important.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2016, 10:37:02 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #25 on: May 12, 2016, 10:37:42 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Volnutt is probably thinking of this less in terms of biology and more in terms of the abuse and trauma inherent in sexual relations with someone subject to one's authority.

As opposed to impregnating someone subject to one's authority?

It's not my argument, merely a recognition that the social justice crusading around here has become just a little too predictable.

Ah, my mistake.  I thought you were endorsing it.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #26 on: May 12, 2016, 10:42:11 PM »
I tend to think He never married just because it would be kind of skeevy for Him to have sex with one of His creatures. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Volnutt is probably thinking of this less in terms of biology and more in terms of the abuse and trauma inherent in sexual relations with someone subject to one's authority.

As opposed to impregnating someone subject to one's authority?

It's not my argument, merely a recognition that the social justice crusading around here has become just a little too predictable.

Ah, my mistake.  I thought you were endorsing it.

Not at all.
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,588
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #27 on: May 12, 2016, 10:52:51 PM »
Jesus want whoever is singing this song.  Case closed.


The original Mary Magdala was Jesus' homegirl hit.

What?

The song quoted was written by a sentimental Victorian meditating on Mary Magdaline's meeting of Christ in the garden.
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #28 on: May 12, 2016, 11:03:23 PM »
Jesus want whoever is singing this song.  Case closed.

Quote

I come to the garden alone
While the dew is still on the roses
And the voice I hear, falling on my ear
The Son of God discloses

(Chorus)
And He walks with me
And He talks with me
And He tells me I am His own
And the joy we share as we tarry there
None other has ever known

He speaks and the sound of His voice
Is so sweet the birds hush their singing
And the melody that He gave to me
Within my heart is ringing

I'd stay in the garden with Him
'Tho the night around me be falling
But He bids me go; through the voice of woe
His voice to me is calling

http://christiansongslyrics.blogspot.com/2012/04/he-walks-with-me-by-anne-murray.html

I think Garrison Keillor sang a parody of that on the air once, with a guest female vocalist.

ETA: Is that song the same as this one?
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 11:04:51 PM by Minnesotan »
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #29 on: May 12, 2016, 11:48:23 PM »
I don't think Christ's celibacy was necessary for Him to achieve the purpose that He came to earth for, but I think that Jewish tradition focuses heavily on marriage and Christ felt it important to show another way and affirm the value of celibacy as well.
God bless!

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #30 on: May 13, 2016, 12:06:48 AM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,226
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #31 on: May 13, 2016, 12:23:58 AM »
Jesus want whoever is singing this song.  Case closed.


The original Mary Magdala was Jesus' homegirl hit.

What?

The song quoted was written by a sentimental Victorian meditating on Mary Magdaline's meeting of Christ in the garden.


"I'll write whatever the hell I please."

Sorry for the mistake in editing. This post is fixed now.

--Mina
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 06:35:56 PM by minasoliman »
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

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

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

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #32 on: May 13, 2016, 01:10:29 AM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.

So is a desire for physical connection with others.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #33 on: May 13, 2016, 01:21:10 AM »
I'm pretty sure people can live without physical connection with others for far longer than they can live without food.
God bless!

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #34 on: May 13, 2016, 02:13:03 AM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.

So is a desire for physical connection with others.

Depends on one's personality?
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #35 on: May 13, 2016, 07:14:56 AM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.

So is a desire for physical connection with others.

Depends on one's personality?

Do monastics die because they don't make physical contact with other human, at least not in a sexual or romantic way? Marrige is something designed to help humans better themselves and others, and God doesn't need any help bettering himself.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #36 on: May 13, 2016, 11:12:15 AM »
I'm pretty sure people can live without physical connection with others for far longer than they can live without food.

Hmm...
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #37 on: May 13, 2016, 11:41:15 AM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.

So is a desire for physical connection with others.

Depends on one's personality?

Do monastics die because they don't make physical contact with other human, at least not in a sexual or romantic way? Marrige is something designed to help humans better themselves and others, and God doesn't need any help bettering himself.

Monastics also don't have a normal human life.

So, since God doesn't need any help bettering himself, I'm assuming you also think Christ didn't partake in Temple worship, didn't practice the Jewish festivals, etc.?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #38 on: May 13, 2016, 11:50:23 AM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.

So is a desire for physical connection with others.

Depends on one's personality?

Do monastics die because they don't make physical contact with other human, at least not in a sexual or romantic way? Marrige is something designed to help humans better themselves and others, and God doesn't need any help bettering himself.

Monastics also don't have a normal human life.

So, since God doesn't need any help bettering himself, I'm assuming you also think Christ didn't partake in Temple worship, didn't practice the Jewish festivals, etc.?

No, he still did these things, but this is because they are something every Jew had to do. Marriage is not a requirement, it is a vocation.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #39 on: May 13, 2016, 12:04:11 PM »
Is there ANY human desire that you think Christ had?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #40 on: May 13, 2016, 01:08:25 PM »
Is there ANY human desire that you think Christ had?

I'm not saying he didn't desire anything at all, but I don't think marriage interested him because of his divinity.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #41 on: May 13, 2016, 01:51:26 PM »
Is there ANY human desire that you think Christ had?

I'm not saying he didn't desire anything at all, but I don't think marriage interested him because of his divinity.

Then shouldn't we all work to not desire marriage, since we're supposed to emulate Christ?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #42 on: May 13, 2016, 01:53:11 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,554
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #43 on: May 13, 2016, 01:58:38 PM »
If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human does not need sexual intercourse to survive.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

I would like to see how long you would survive without food.  Biologically speaking the body needs fuel to function.

The human body needs food and water to survive. While a human can go for more than three weeks without food (Mahatma Gandhi survived 21 days of complete starvation), I doubt the quality of life is good, or that it would last beyond those three weeks.


Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.

So is a desire for physical connection with others.

Do you think Christ was lonely?  He was surrounded by a loving family, especially a super mother.  He then had 12 close friends.  How many close friends do most people have?   He had many other friends - Lazarus, Martha, Mary, Nicodemus, etc.

As a "man" he was not lacking in human companionship.


Monastics also don't have a normal human life.

So, since God doesn't need any help bettering himself, I'm assuming you also think Christ didn't partake in Temple worship, didn't practice the Jewish festivals, etc.?

One might argue that indeed they do live a normal human life...and it is the rest of us who do not.

Is there ANY human desire that you think Christ had?

Yes, He ate and drank, conversed with others...and mostly he had a deep desire to help others. 
Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #44 on: May 13, 2016, 02:03:08 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

If your argument was only falling apart before, it has just collapsed.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 02:03:19 PM by Mor Ephrem »
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #45 on: May 13, 2016, 02:19:00 PM »
When you say "tempted in all things", does that mean Christ had homosexual urges, or serial killing urges, or suicidal temptations?
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #46 on: May 13, 2016, 02:27:06 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

Also, on an unrelated note, what would be the out come of Christ having a child with one of His creations? Would the child be some sort of demi-god? Or would the child become a new 'fourth' person in the Godhead? Or would the child be just a regular human? I think only God knows, and whatever that knowledge is, He decided it wouldn't be good.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #47 on: May 13, 2016, 04:11:16 PM »
Concentrating on whether Christ gets physically married or not seems to be missing a few points of Christ's person and ministry.  He came for all, because of all, on behalf of all, and in all.  Christ is all good things for all humanity, and places all humanity into His eternal relationship with the Father.  He is married to all humanity in that sense.  His mission was all on this, not in physical relationships.  Other saints who have concentrated their mission to Christ to such an extent that physical marriage never crosses their minds.  So to be "tempted" in all things does not mean Christ was "tempted" with physical relationships, but He was passionately moved to take all our physicalities into His divine spiritual realm.  He desires to marry us into a much higher purpose.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,594
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #48 on: May 13, 2016, 06:21:34 PM »
If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin. 
Not necessarily.

Desire for whatever it was, yeah. But desiring something good, that in the circumstances, would be a sin to possess, is not the same as desiring a sin.

But yeah, of course he did desire.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 06:22:53 PM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #49 on: May 13, 2016, 07:21:12 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #50 on: May 13, 2016, 07:22:30 PM »
If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin. 
Not necessarily.

Desire for whatever it was, yeah. But desiring something good, that in the circumstances, would be a sin to possess, is not the same as desiring a sin.

But yeah, of course he did desire.

Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #51 on: May 13, 2016, 07:24:31 PM »
When you say "tempted in all things", does that mean Christ had homosexual urges, or serial killing urges, or suicidal temptations?

It isn't me that says "tempted in all things."  It's Hebrews that says Christ "was in all points tempted like as we are[.]"

What specific sins he was tempted to I don't think is the question. 
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #52 on: May 13, 2016, 07:31:54 PM »
When you say "tempted in all things", does that mean Christ had homosexual urges, or serial killing urges, or suicidal temptations?

It isn't me that says "tempted in all things."  It's Hebrews that says Christ "was in all points tempted like as we are[.]"

What specific sins he was tempted to I don't think is the question.
when read St. John Chrysostom's interpretation of it, he seems to mean something different by "tempted" than you do
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #53 on: May 13, 2016, 07:33:00 PM »
If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin. 
Not necessarily.

Desire for whatever it was, yeah. But desiring something good, that in the circumstances, would be a sin to possess, is not the same as desiring a sin.

But yeah, of course he did desire.

Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.

Now you're contradicting yourself
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #54 on: May 13, 2016, 07:49:17 PM »
If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin. 
Not necessarily.

Desire for whatever it was, yeah. But desiring something good, that in the circumstances, would be a sin to possess, is not the same as desiring a sin.

But yeah, of course he did desire.

Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.

Now you're contradicting yourself

How?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #55 on: May 13, 2016, 07:50:29 PM »
When you say "tempted in all things", does that mean Christ had homosexual urges, or serial killing urges, or suicidal temptations?

It isn't me that says "tempted in all things."  It's Hebrews that says Christ "was in all points tempted like as we are[.]"

What specific sins he was tempted to I don't think is the question.
when read St. John Chrysostom's interpretation of it, he seems to mean something different by "tempted" than you do

Quote?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #56 on: May 13, 2016, 08:08:30 PM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself.

EDIT: I know I did use "need" in my first post, but I meant need in the way people say they "need to find a friend" or "need to have more free time." Marriage is beneficial to people, but God doesn't need to be benefitted, He is perfect already.

Strictly speaking, a human doesn't need food.  One can easily choose to forgo it.

Well, yes, assuming you want to commit suicide. I thought that it was implicit that it's essential for a normal human life.

So is a desire for physical connection with others.

Depends on one's personality?

Do monastics die because they don't make physical contact with other human, at least not in a sexual or romantic way? Marrige is something designed to help humans better themselves and others, and God doesn't need any help bettering himself.

True, I didn't really consider the "physical" part of his question. I was thinking in terms of intimate friendships (which most monastics would seem to have, if they aren't hermits) that most people seem to need to live a healthy life but some can go without because they're extreme loners by nature (maybe it takes that kind of personality to be a monastic hermit, I don't know).

I suppose that makes my response a non sequitur lol.
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #57 on: May 13, 2016, 09:10:05 PM »
Is there ANY human desire that you think Christ had?

I'm not saying he didn't desire anything at all, but I don't think marriage interested him because of his divinity.

Then shouldn't we all work to not desire marriage, since we're supposed to emulate Christ?
I wear sandals to work for this very reason. Sadly, the HR dept refuses to believe it is a sincerely held religious belief.  :(
God bless!

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #58 on: May 13, 2016, 09:17:59 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #59 on: May 13, 2016, 09:25:09 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #60 on: May 13, 2016, 10:08:52 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #61 on: May 13, 2016, 10:30:50 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #62 on: May 13, 2016, 10:33:15 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #63 on: May 13, 2016, 10:57:02 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #64 on: May 13, 2016, 11:08:14 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #65 on: May 13, 2016, 11:29:09 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #66 on: May 13, 2016, 11:33:30 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #67 on: May 13, 2016, 11:34:42 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #68 on: May 13, 2016, 11:36:38 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

And as many of us as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.  If Christ being married would mess with the Trinity, then guess what: It's already messed up.

I am a member of the Body of Christ.  Mor is a member of the Body of Christ.  If being a part of Christ's Body doesn't make us one flesh, then marriage certainly doesn't.  And if it does make us one flesh with Christ then, according to your view, the "eternal relationship of the Trinity" has many new persons in the Godhead.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #69 on: May 13, 2016, 11:37:15 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

Can a priest's wife celebrate the Divine Liturgy? 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #70 on: May 13, 2016, 11:40:03 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

Can a priest's wife celebrate the Divine Liturgy?


Wait....your church doesn't do that?  But Prebytera assured us that all the parishes in the old country let the priest's wife substitute for her husband!
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #71 on: May 13, 2016, 11:41:37 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

I do think that, although to variating degrees, every action of Christ was somehow done to bring about salvation for at least an individual, if not the whole of humanity. God has a reason for everything, even if we do not realize what it is. 
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #72 on: May 13, 2016, 11:43:05 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

I do think that, although to variating degrees, every action of Christ was somehow done to bring about salvation for at least an individual, if not the whole of humanity. God has a reason for everything, even if we do not realize what it is.

What about when he slept? 
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #73 on: May 13, 2016, 11:45:54 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

Can a priest's wife celebrate the Divine Liturgy?

The three persons of the Trinity don't all do the exact same things. Only the Son became incarnate, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit did this. And only the Spirit was poured our at Pentecost, not the Son and the Father with Him. The three persons do separate things but are still united by their divinity.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #74 on: May 13, 2016, 11:48:51 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

I do think that, although to variating degrees, every action of Christ was somehow done to bring about salvation for at least an individual, if not the whole of humanity. God has a reason for everything, even if we do not realize what it is.

What about when he slept?

By sleeping He is joining in our humanity. If He did not sleep then He would have died from sleep deprivation. But He didn't die from not getting married, and so He didn't.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #75 on: May 13, 2016, 11:59:25 PM »
If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin. 
Not necessarily.

Desire for whatever it was, yeah. But desiring something good, that in the circumstances, would be a sin to possess, is not the same as desiring a sin.

But yeah, of course he did desire.

Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.

Now you're contradicting yourself

How?

First you interpret the verse as receiving all kinds of temptations, but then you admit He didn't have every single temptation every human being has.  That's a contradiction.



When you say "tempted in all things", does that mean Christ had homosexual urges, or serial killing urges, or suicidal temptations?

It isn't me that says "tempted in all things."  It's Hebrews that says Christ "was in all points tempted like as we are[.]"

What specific sins he was tempted to I don't think is the question.
when read St. John Chrysostom's interpretation of it, he seems to mean something different by "tempted" than you do

Quote?

"For we have not an High Priest, who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities." He is not (he means) ignorant of what concerns us, as many of the High Priests, who know not those in tribulations, nor that there is tribulation at any time. For in the case of men it is impossible that one should know the affliction of the afflicted who has not had experience, and gone through the actual sensations. Our High Priest endured all things. Therefore He endured first and then ascended, that He might be able to sympathize with us.

"But was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Observe how both above he has used the word "in like manner", and here "after the likeness". (Hebrews 2:14) That is, He was persecuted, was spit upon, was accused, was mocked at, was falsely informed against, was driven out, at last was crucified.

"After our likeness, without sin." In these words another thing also is suggested, that it is possible even for one in afflictions to go through them without sin. So that when he says also "in the likeness of flesh" (Romans 8:3), he means not that He took on Him [merely] the likeness of flesh, but flesh. Why then did he say in the likeness? Because he was speaking about sinful flesh: for it was like our flesh, since in nature it was the same with us, but in sin no longer the same.
Chrysostom, Homily 7 of Hebrews

It seems St. John is talking about blameless passions, not the temptations you think of like lust, greed, uncontrollable anger, desire of vengeance, etc.  It is through blameless passions that Adam was tempted and fell into sin, and it is through blameless passions that Christ was tempted and succeeded, recapitulating and redeeming us.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2016, 12:08:38 AM by minasoliman »
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #76 on: May 14, 2016, 12:11:33 AM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

I do think that, although to variating degrees, every action of Christ was somehow done to bring about salvation for at least an individual, if not the whole of humanity. God has a reason for everything, even if we do not realize what it is.

What about when he slept?

By sleeping He is joining in our humanity. If He did not sleep then He would have died from sleep deprivation. But He didn't die from not getting married, and so He didn't.

No.  Sleeping did not join him in our humanity.  Becoming incarnate did.  He was no less human awake than asleep.  Just as I do not transcend my humanity when I stay up for 30 hours at a time.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #77 on: May 14, 2016, 12:15:57 AM »
If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin. 
Not necessarily.

Desire for whatever it was, yeah. But desiring something good, that in the circumstances, would be a sin to possess, is not the same as desiring a sin.

But yeah, of course he did desire.

Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.

Now you're contradicting yourself

How?

First you interpret the verse as receiving all kinds of temptations, but then you admit He didn't have every single temptation every human being has.  That's a contradiction.



When you say "tempted in all things", does that mean Christ had homosexual urges, or serial killing urges, or suicidal temptations?

It isn't me that says "tempted in all things."  It's Hebrews that says Christ "was in all points tempted like as we are[.]"

What specific sins he was tempted to I don't think is the question.
when read St. John Chrysostom's interpretation of it, he seems to mean something different by "tempted" than you do

Quote?

"For we have not an High Priest, who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities." He is not (he means) ignorant of what concerns us, as many of the High Priests, who know not those in tribulations, nor that there is tribulation at any time. For in the case of men it is impossible that one should know the affliction of the afflicted who has not had experience, and gone through the actual sensations. Our High Priest endured all things. Therefore He endured first and then ascended, that He might be able to sympathize with us.

"But was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Observe how both above he has used the word "in like manner", and here "after the likeness". (Hebrews 2:14) That is, He was persecuted, was spit upon, was accused, was mocked at, was falsely informed against, was driven out, at last was crucified.

"After our likeness, without sin." In these words another thing also is suggested, that it is possible even for one in afflictions to go through them without sin. So that when he says also "in the likeness of flesh" (Romans 8:3), he means not that He took on Him [merely] the likeness of flesh, but flesh. Why then did he say in the likeness? Because he was speaking about sinful flesh: for it was like our flesh, since in nature it was the same with us, but in sin no longer the same.
Chrysostom, Homily 7 of Hebrews

It seems St. John is talking about blameless passions, not the temptations you think of like lust, greed, uncontrollable anger, desire of vengeance, etc.  It is through blameless passions that Adam was tempted and fell into sin, and it is through blameless passions that Christ was tempted and succeeded, recapitulating and redeeming us.


I actually wasn't contradicting myself.  You've misinterpreted me.  I said - and say now - that Christ was tempted in every way.  That does not mean that he had every possible instance of a temptation.  For example, he clearly was never tempted to look at internet pornography.  yet, he was tempted in every way - which I imagine the author of Hebrews meant as something along the lines of "The natures of his temptations were exactly as ours are"


As to your Chrysostom quote, it seems to me that Chrysostom was avoiding the question.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #78 on: May 14, 2016, 12:21:00 AM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

I do think that, although to variating degrees, every action of Christ was somehow done to bring about salvation for at least an individual, if not the whole of humanity. God has a reason for everything, even if we do not realize what it is.

What about when he slept?

By sleeping He is joining in our humanity. If He did not sleep then He would have died from sleep deprivation. But He didn't die from not getting married, and so He didn't.

No.  Sleeping did not join him in our humanity.  Becoming incarnate did.  He was no less human awake than asleep.  Just as I do not transcend my humanity when I stay up for 30 hours at a time.

Sleeping was a consequence of His incarnation. He wouldn't have been fully human if He didn't sleep. So that is why He slept. And I didn't say He was less human when awake, but that if He never slept at all the He would indeed have been less that human. But He did sleep, because He is fully human.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #79 on: May 14, 2016, 12:26:53 AM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

Everything Christ did was salvific.  That was everything that was on His mind.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #80 on: May 14, 2016, 12:42:23 AM »
If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin. 
Not necessarily.

Desire for whatever it was, yeah. But desiring something good, that in the circumstances, would be a sin to possess, is not the same as desiring a sin.

But yeah, of course he did desire.

Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.

Now you're contradicting yourself

How?

First you interpret the verse as receiving all kinds of temptations, but then you admit He didn't have every single temptation every human being has.  That's a contradiction.



When you say "tempted in all things", does that mean Christ had homosexual urges, or serial killing urges, or suicidal temptations?

It isn't me that says "tempted in all things."  It's Hebrews that says Christ "was in all points tempted like as we are[.]"

What specific sins he was tempted to I don't think is the question.
when read St. John Chrysostom's interpretation of it, he seems to mean something different by "tempted" than you do

Quote?

"For we have not an High Priest, who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities." He is not (he means) ignorant of what concerns us, as many of the High Priests, who know not those in tribulations, nor that there is tribulation at any time. For in the case of men it is impossible that one should know the affliction of the afflicted who has not had experience, and gone through the actual sensations. Our High Priest endured all things. Therefore He endured first and then ascended, that He might be able to sympathize with us.

"But was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Observe how both above he has used the word "in like manner", and here "after the likeness". (Hebrews 2:14) That is, He was persecuted, was spit upon, was accused, was mocked at, was falsely informed against, was driven out, at last was crucified.

"After our likeness, without sin." In these words another thing also is suggested, that it is possible even for one in afflictions to go through them without sin. So that when he says also "in the likeness of flesh" (Romans 8:3), he means not that He took on Him [merely] the likeness of flesh, but flesh. Why then did he say in the likeness? Because he was speaking about sinful flesh: for it was like our flesh, since in nature it was the same with us, but in sin no longer the same.
Chrysostom, Homily 7 of Hebrews

It seems St. John is talking about blameless passions, not the temptations you think of like lust, greed, uncontrollable anger, desire of vengeance, etc.  It is through blameless passions that Adam was tempted and fell into sin, and it is through blameless passions that Christ was tempted and succeeded, recapitulating and redeeming us.

t



I actually wasn't contradicting myself.  You've misinterpreted me.  I said - and say now - that Christ was tempted in every way.  That does not mean that he had every possible instance of a temptation.  For example, he clearly was never tempted to look at internet pornography.  yet, he was tempted in every way - which I imagine the author of Hebrews meant as something along the lines of "The natures of his temptations were exactly as ours are"


As to your Chrysostom quote, it seems to me that Chrysostom was avoiding the question.

Not really.  It seems in today's world, when people want Christ to be "tempted" they think of their own lusts.  They don't think Christ had a higher spiritual level to not even allow these temptations to enter into His heart.  What He allowed?  Hunger at the wrong time, tempting God to send Angels, worshipping Satan to gain vainglory, revealing His own Messianic powers to save Himself from the Cross.  These all stem from the same methods used against us, except for us, it leads to lust, greed, wrath, etc.  For every spiritual level a person is in, the temptations reach a stronger and more subtle character.  Christ was at His hungriest and at His weakest after much excruciating torture that would lead anyone to give up and sin.  Christ didn't do that.

When people stop speculating on every single sinful thought and call that "temptation", then people would start to realize fathers like Chrysostom didn't avoid the question, but answered it pretty clear to his audience.  Apparently, today's audience want more out of Christ, in ignorance of the vast Body of Christ in His saints who lived your own worst temptations.  You want a Christ who had lust?  Find that in St. Mary of Egypt.  You want a Christ who had murderous temptations, find that in St. Moses.  You want a married Christ?  There are plenty.  You want a celibate Christ, there are plenty.  Christ did not need to fulfill your definition of temptation. Christ's mindset was to bring us into His triune relationship.  Our mindset is to try to achieve that in Him by the example of His saints.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,594
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #81 on: May 14, 2016, 02:59:11 AM »
Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.
What would be pure sin objects of desire? I dunno, in the Scriptures usually someone wants something that is good, like fruit, a beautiful woman, authority, and ends up doing evil to get it. That seems to be the sin deal.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2016, 02:59:48 AM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #82 on: May 14, 2016, 05:09:09 AM »
Is that really the only way man is tempted to sin?  Because Hebrews says Christ was tempted in all ways we were.  Clearly, that doesn't mean that he had every single temptation that any given human might have, but it would certainly seem to suggest he was tempted in all the same manners as we are.
What would be pure sin objects of desire? I dunno, in the Scriptures usually someone wants something that is good, like fruit, a beautiful woman, authority, and ends up doing evil to get it. That seems to be the sin deal.

Pedophilia? Or is that just a perversion of a good desire?
« Last Edit: May 14, 2016, 05:10:10 AM by Volnutt »
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #83 on: May 14, 2016, 09:51:05 AM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

I do think that, although to variating degrees, every action of Christ was somehow done to bring about salvation for at least an individual, if not the whole of humanity. God has a reason for everything, even if we do not realize what it is.

What about when he slept?

By sleeping He is joining in our humanity. If He did not sleep then He would have died from sleep deprivation. But He didn't die from not getting married, and so He didn't.

No.  Sleeping did not join him in our humanity.  Becoming incarnate did.  He was no less human awake than asleep.  Just as I do not transcend my humanity when I stay up for 30 hours at a time.

Sleeping was a consequence of His incarnation. He wouldn't have been fully human if He didn't sleep. So that is why He slept. And I didn't say He was less human when awake, but that if He never slept at all the He would indeed have been less that human. But He did sleep, because He is fully human.

Likewise Christ would not have been fully human if he did not have human desires.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Sinful Hypocrite

  • Everyday I am critical of others. Every day I make similar mistakes. Every day I am a hypocrite.
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,292
  • The Lord helps those who help others
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: God
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #84 on: May 14, 2016, 10:18:10 AM »
I wouldn't say that Christ never married because it would inhibit our salvation, but rather because He is God and thus is self sufficient. God is completely satisfied in Himself when it comes to romance and sexuality. I wouldn't say He is above these things, but He doesn't need them in the same way humans do.

Unless we're speaking about different Christs, I'm pretty sure he was and is human.

By "humans" I ment humans who aren't also God.

If a God is human, he needs everything that a human needs.

I thought part of why God came down and became human in form, was to also experience temptation as a human being, no?
The Lord gathers his sheep, I fear I am a goat. Lord have mercy.

"A Christian is someone who follows and worships a perfectly good God who revealed his true face through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.“

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #85 on: May 14, 2016, 10:53:52 AM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

Can a priest's wife celebrate the Divine Liturgy?

The three persons of the Trinity don't all do the exact same things. Only the Son became incarnate, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit did this. And only the Spirit was poured our at Pentecost, not the Son and the Father with Him. The three persons do separate things but are still united by their divinity.

But your argument was that marriage unites two people into one, and so what is proper to one person is proper to the other.  If a marriage between Jesus and, say, Jennifer means that we now have a Tetrad, how does ordination of a man not also ordain his wife?   
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #86 on: May 14, 2016, 02:07:46 PM »
Also, how do you square that with the long-standing belief that Christ was tempted in all things just as we are?

A tradition, btw, dating back to the New Testament: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

If he was really tempted "as we are" that means that he had some level of desire for the sin.  If Christ could, to some degree, desire sin, then he could certainly desire marriage.

Marriage isn't sinful, so wanting to get married isn't comparable to temptation. A desire for marriage is not inherently universal. There are many people who simply don't want to get married, and Christ was most likely one of these people.

So Christ could be genuinely tempted to sin, but at the same time, but yet he doesn't need the things other humans do, because he's God?  That seems like strange logic to me.  Your words from earlier, which I've quoted below, strongly seem to suggest that Christ had no human desires, because he's God and he's perfect.  And that seems to be your argument for why Christ would never have married.  That seems really, really, strange if you accept that Christ was tempted to sin.

"A human doesn't have a physical need for marriage, but it's a strong desire. God, however, doesn't desire marrige because He is a unity in Himself. "

Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

So Christ derived no benefit from being with other people?

He may have gained pleasure from being with humanity, but He didn't need to benefit from marriage specifically in the way some people do.

Why do you assume marriage is always for a benefit other than to "[gain] pleasure"?  Aside from questions of whether or not "gain[ing] pleasure" is itself a benefit (and I'd also point out that if Christ was "satisfied within Himself" then he couldn't actually gain anything from anyone), I'd argue that a great many marriages are made precisely because - and solely because - people gain pleasure from being with that other person.

Also, Christ wasn't just 'with humanity,' he was (and is) humanity.

By "gained pleasure" I meant Christ genuinely enjoyed being human and living and relating to humans, but it wasn't something that He needed to do to be happy, but chose to do for our salvation. But getting married wouldn't help our salvation, so He didn't.

Do you think every single word he ever said was oriented toward our salvation in a direct way?  That before he laughed at a joke, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he chose when to eat and what to eat, he thought "Will this save them?"  Before he picked a hobby, he thought "Will this save them?"

What I'm asking is: Do you really think Christ did nothing on Earth because he wanted to do it?

I do think that, although to variating degrees, every action of Christ was somehow done to bring about salvation for at least an individual, if not the whole of humanity. God has a reason for everything, even if we do not realize what it is.

What about when he slept?

By sleeping He is joining in our humanity. If He did not sleep then He would have died from sleep deprivation. But He didn't die from not getting married, and so He didn't.

No.  Sleeping did not join him in our humanity.  Becoming incarnate did.  He was no less human awake than asleep.  Just as I do not transcend my humanity when I stay up for 30 hours at a time.

Sleeping was a consequence of His incarnation. He wouldn't have been fully human if He didn't sleep. So that is why He slept. And I didn't say He was less human when awake, but that if He never slept at all the He would indeed have been less that human. But He did sleep, because He is fully human.

Likewise Christ would not have been fully human if he did not have human desires.

He certainly had desires, but not the desire to marry. Humans can want a whole slew of things besides marriage.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #87 on: May 14, 2016, 02:11:03 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

Can a priest's wife celebrate the Divine Liturgy?

The three persons of the Trinity don't all do the exact same things. Only the Son became incarnate, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit did this. And only the Spirit was poured our at Pentecost, not the Son and the Father with Him. The three persons do separate things but are still united by their divinity.

But your argument was that marriage unites two people into one, and so what is proper to one person is proper to the other.  If a marriage between Jesus and, say, Jennifer means that we now have a Tetrad, how does ordination of a man not also ordain his wife?

Two married people do not become exactly the same, just as each person of the Trinity is not the same. However, both marriage and the Trinity are mystical unions that bond people together into an oneness that cannot be fully understood.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,212
  • Saint Nicholas Saves Three Innocents from Death
  • Jurisdiction: The thrilling romance of Holy Orthodoxy
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #88 on: May 14, 2016, 02:47:48 PM »
He certainly had desires, but not the desire to marry. Humans can want a whole slew of things besides marriage.
I find a desire to marry strange.
"The business of the Christian is nothing else than to be ever preparing for death (μελεπᾷν ἀποθνήσκειν)."

— Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragment XI

Modernist thinking and being consists of nothing but uncritical acceptance.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #89 on: May 14, 2016, 03:11:23 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

Can a priest's wife celebrate the Divine Liturgy?

The three persons of the Trinity don't all do the exact same things. Only the Son became incarnate, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit did this. And only the Spirit was poured our at Pentecost, not the Son and the Father with Him. The three persons do separate things but are still united by their divinity.

But your argument was that marriage unites two people into one, and so what is proper to one person is proper to the other.  If a marriage between Jesus and, say, Jennifer means that we now have a Tetrad, how does ordination of a man not also ordain his wife?

Two married people do not become exactly the same, just as each person of the Trinity is not the same. However, both marriage and the Trinity are mystical unions that bond people together into an oneness that cannot be fully understood.

I suggest you study more and teach less.  Both you and JamesRottnek have really butchered things up here quite a bit, but at least you have a chance. 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #90 on: May 14, 2016, 03:24:41 PM »
Marriage is not a temptation. It is something that some people want because they benefit from being with another person. But God is unified and satisfied within Himself, so he didn't need to get married to be happy.

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Trinity one in essence and undivided."

Exactly, no need to add a fourth. The 'other person' I spoke of would be person #4 not person #2.

You said that God is unified and satisfied within himself and doesn't need another person, but we believe in a God who has a Son and a Spirit.  Personal relationship is part of who he is.  Our personhood and our relationships flow from and are reflections of his.  If humans need other humans and need to be in relationship with them--and they do, whatever form that takes--that's not something that has nothing to do with God. 

Whether or not Jesus "needed" to get married really has nothing to do with his need or lack of need for relationships (e.g., "being with another person").  He was born among us.  He had a mother, a father, brothers and sisters, friends, teachers, etc.  He had relationships.  None of those added to the Trinity.   

But a marriage is a different thing than these other relationships. In marriage, "they are no longer two, but one flesh." This sort of union would mess with the eternal relationship of the Trinity by adding a new person to the Godhead.

Can a priest's wife celebrate the Divine Liturgy?

The three persons of the Trinity don't all do the exact same things. Only the Son became incarnate, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit did this. And only the Spirit was poured our at Pentecost, not the Son and the Father with Him. The three persons do separate things but are still united by their divinity.

But your argument was that marriage unites two people into one, and so what is proper to one person is proper to the other.  If a marriage between Jesus and, say, Jennifer means that we now have a Tetrad, how does ordination of a man not also ordain his wife?

Two married people do not become exactly the same, just as each person of the Trinity is not the same. However, both marriage and the Trinity are mystical unions that bond people together into an oneness that cannot be fully understood.

I suggest you study more and teach less.  Both you and JamesRottnek have really butchered things up here quite a bit, but at least you have a chance.

Forgive me if I come across as arrogant. I strive to be open and willing to learn everyday. However, I still believe the reason I have presented for Christ's never getting married to be correct. I have yet to see an alternative reason.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #91 on: May 14, 2016, 03:32:01 PM »
How about: Because we have no reason to believe he did?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #92 on: May 14, 2016, 03:32:46 PM »
Forgive me if I come across as arrogant. I strive to be open and willing to learn everyday. However, I still believe the reason I have presented for Christ's never getting married to be correct. I have yet to see an alternative reason.

Your theological presuppositions are, to an extent, flawed, and so your argument fails. 

"Why did Christ not marry?"  Before putting up one's reasons for why he didn't in response to someone else's reasons for why he could/may have, we need to ask why this question is even relevant. 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #93 on: May 14, 2016, 03:38:08 PM »

How about: Because we have no reason to believe he did?
That's an answer to whether or not Christ did marry, which wasn't the OP's question. The OP asked why this was.
That made me wonder something. We know that Christ didn't marry, but was the fact that He remained single essential to our salvation, or merely accidental? Meaning, if He had gotten married, could we have still been saved? Or did He actually need to remain single in order to accomplish His work? Has anyone commented on this?
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #94 on: May 14, 2016, 03:40:17 PM »
Forgive me if I come across as arrogant. I strive to be open and willing to learn everyday. However, I still believe the reason I have presented for Christ's never getting married to be correct. I have yet to see an alternative reason.

Your theological presuppositions are, to an extent, flawed, and so your argument fails. 

"Why did Christ not marry?"  Before putting up one's reasons for why he didn't in response to someone else's reasons for why he could/may have, we need to ask why this question is even relevant.

The question is relevant because it's what this thread is about. I simply gave my own answer to the question raised in the OP.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #95 on: May 14, 2016, 03:53:39 PM »
Forgive me if I come across as arrogant. I strive to be open and willing to learn everyday. However, I still believe the reason I have presented for Christ's never getting married to be correct. I have yet to see an alternative reason.

Your theological presuppositions are, to an extent, flawed, and so your argument fails. 

"Why did Christ not marry?"  Before putting up one's reasons for why he didn't in response to someone else's reasons for why he could/may have, we need to ask why this question is even relevant.

The question is relevant because it's what this thread is about. I simply gave my own answer to the question raised in the OP.

Fair enough.  But I hope we can now appreciate why such speculation often does more harm than good.
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline HaydenTE

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,123
  • Always honest, occasionally correct.
  • Faith: Ukrainian Greek Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Saint Josaphat in Parma
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #96 on: May 14, 2016, 03:57:13 PM »
Forgive me if I come across as arrogant. I strive to be open and willing to learn everyday. However, I still believe the reason I have presented for Christ's never getting married to be correct. I have yet to see an alternative reason.

Your theological presuppositions are, to an extent, flawed, and so your argument fails. 

"Why did Christ not marry?"  Before putting up one's reasons for why he didn't in response to someone else's reasons for why he could/may have, we need to ask why this question is even relevant.

The question is relevant because it's what this thread is about. I simply gave my own answer to the question raised in the OP.

Fair enough.  But I hope we can now appreciate why such speculation often does more harm than good.

Yes, it often does.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" - Mark 8:36 (DRA)

Offline wgw

  • All scorpions must DIE!!!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,816
  • This icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #97 on: May 14, 2016, 10:14:58 PM »
I'm pretty sure people can live without physical connection with others for far longer than they can live without food.

Good point.   See St. Paul the Hermit.  Had St. Anthony not accidentally found him, he would have never seen another human again, and as it was, he saw one man, once, while still alive,for the several decades of his hermeticism, so far as we know.  Yet during that time he ate daily bread and other food brought to him by crows, and drank from the oasis, and ate the odd dare-palm as well.
Axios and many years to you, Fr. Trenham!

Offline Cyprian700

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 93
  • Archangel Michael Byzantine Icon (early 14th c.)
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #98 on: May 22, 2016, 09:46:12 PM »
Someone wrote:
Quote
Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Nowhere does the Church define the mystery of the Holy Nativity of Christ in such a manner as you have described: "delivered through the vagina."  Christ passed through the womb of the Holy Virgin in a miraculous fashion, without breaking the seal of her virginity.  Let our speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #99 on: May 22, 2016, 10:09:10 PM »
Someone wrote:
Quote
Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Nowhere does the Church define the mystery of the Holy Nativity of Christ in such a manner as you have described: "delivered through the vagina."  Christ passed through the womb of the Holy Virgin in a miraculous fashion, without breaking the seal of her virginity.  Let our speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt.

The Protoevangelium says He was teleported out of her in a cloud of light, but is that the same as "the Church" saying so?

Does He have to have broken her hymen in order to be delivered vaginally? I used to think so, but now I'm not so sure.
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #100 on: May 23, 2016, 10:42:12 PM »
Someone wrote:
Quote
Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Nowhere does the Church define the mystery of the Holy Nativity of Christ in such a manner as you have described: "delivered through the vagina."  Christ passed through the womb of the Holy Virgin in a miraculous fashion, without breaking the seal of her virginity.  Let our speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt.

Passed through her womb how, then?  Did Jesus teleport into her arms?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #101 on: May 23, 2016, 11:02:28 PM »
Someone wrote:
Quote
Was it "skeevy" for him to be delivered through the vagina of one of his creatures?

Nowhere does the Church define the mystery of the Holy Nativity of Christ in such a manner as you have described: "delivered through the vagina."  Christ passed through the womb of the Holy Virgin in a miraculous fashion, without breaking the seal of her virginity.  Let our speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt.

Passed through her womb how, then?  Did Jesus teleport into her arms?

The Protoevangelium of James would seem to indicate as much:

Quote
And the midwife went away with him. And they stood in the place of the cave, and behold a luminous cloud overshadowed the cave. And the midwife said: My soul has been magnified this day, because my eyes have seen strange things— because salvation has been brought forth to Israel. And immediately the cloud disappeared out of the cave, and a great light shone in the cave, so that the eyes could not bear it. And in a little that light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared, and went and took the breast from His mother Mary. And the midwife cried out, and said: This is a great day to me, because I have seen this strange sight. And the midwife went forth out of the cave, and Salome met her. And she said to her: Salome, Salome, I have a strange sight to relate to you: a virgin has brought forth— a thing which her nature admits not of. Then said Salome: As the Lord my God lives, unless I thrust in my finger, and search the parts, I will not believe that a virgin has brought forth.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0847.htm
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #102 on: May 24, 2016, 12:38:06 AM »
That sounds insane.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #103 on: May 24, 2016, 03:51:52 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 03:52:28 PM by minasoliman »
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline RaphaCam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,564
  • It is honourable to reveal the works of God
    • Em Espírito e em Verdade
  • Faith: Big-O Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Exarchate of Gotham City
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #104 on: May 24, 2016, 08:02:48 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 08:08:21 PM by RaphaCam »
"May the Lord our God remember in His kingdom all Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, which heralds the Word of Truth and fearlessly offers and distributes the Holy Oblation despite human deficiencies and persecutions moved by the powers of this world, in all time and unto the ages of ages."

Check my blog "Em Espírito e em Verdade" (in Portuguese)

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #105 on: May 24, 2016, 09:47:18 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.

No, it's insane from a perspective of "Jesus is a human who was born of a woman"
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #106 on: May 24, 2016, 09:51:05 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.

No, it's insane from a perspective of "Jesus is a human who was born of a woman"

And yet his being human doesn't require a baby daddy.  Or does it? 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #107 on: May 24, 2016, 10:28:51 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.

No, it's insane from a perspective of "Jesus is a human who was born of a woman"

And yet his being human doesn't require a baby daddy.  Or does it?

No.  But his being born of a woman requires something other than teleportation.
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #108 on: May 24, 2016, 11:04:45 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.

No, it's insane from a perspective of "Jesus is a human who was born of a woman"

And yet his being human doesn't require a baby daddy.  Or does it?

No.  But his being born of a woman requires something other than teleportation.

No one said this belief equated teleportation.  That's your own polemical presupposition.

It's like an atheist who says that the Eucharist is cannibalism.  That's also their own presuppositions that we don't follow.

Christ was truly human, and truly a man with a Y chromosome.  He was born of a virgin woman who had no Y chromosome to provide for Him.  What does that tell you?
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 11:06:35 PM by minasoliman »
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,199
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #109 on: May 24, 2016, 11:19:21 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.

No, it's insane from a perspective of "Jesus is a human who was born of a woman"

And yet his being human doesn't require a baby daddy.  Or does it?

No.  But his being born of a woman requires something other than teleportation.

That sounds insane.
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,256
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #110 on: May 24, 2016, 11:24:15 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.

No, it's insane from a perspective of "Jesus is a human who was born of a woman"

And yet his being human doesn't require a baby daddy.  Or does it?

No.  But his being born of a woman requires something other than teleportation.

No one said this belief equated teleportation.  That's your own polemical presupposition.

It's like an atheist who says that the Eucharist is cannibalism.  That's also their own presuppositions that we don't follow.

Christ was truly human, and truly a man with a Y chromosome.  He was born of a virgin woman who had no Y chromosome to provide for Him.  What does that tell you?

" and behold a luminous cloud overshadowed the cave. And the midwife said: My soul has been magnified this day, because my eyes have seen strange things— because salvation has been brought forth to Israel. And immediately the cloud disappeared out of the cave, and a great light shone in the cave, so that the eyes could not bear it. And in a little that light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared, and went and took the breast from His mother Mary"

In what way is this not teleportation?
"Homosexuality has been a popular topic, but not Satanic trances."

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,000
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #111 on: May 24, 2016, 11:31:42 PM »
First of all, this document from 150AD can contain some popular beliefs.  Given that the Church fathers used the prophecy of Ezekiel to describe the Virgin's perpetual virginity, along with "keeping the seal shut", one can say that both the Protoevangelium and this Ezekiel interpretation come from a common source.  Therefore, not everything in this writing is to be taken as face value acceptable by the Church.

NEVERTHELESS, nothing in what you quoted makes it clear that this is "teleportation".  In the same thing you and I are reading, you are interpreting it differently than I could.  It simply says a huge cloud and light appeared, and when it gradually went away, the child was already born and took hold of His mother's breasts.  The light could simply be a blinding way to cover the miraculous birth-giving.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2016, 11:34:11 PM by minasoliman »
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,599
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #112 on: May 24, 2016, 11:34:42 PM »
This was discussed in detail recently in this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,68521.0.html

I think a lot of good points can be read in there before we call something "insane".  Furthermore, before we call something "insane", we need to put some perspective on things that are believed and why are they believed.  Put yourself in the shoes of an atheist who reads this, and could easily respond, "yea, keeping the seal shut is insane, but virgin pregnancy is TOTALLY sane."

So before you berate what has been believed, take a step back and ask why.
It's insane for worldly wisdom. Far from calling James worldly, I think we all tend to approach high things with this kind of mentality.

No, it's insane from a perspective of "Jesus is a human who was born of a woman"

And yet his being human doesn't require a baby daddy.  Or does it?

No.  But his being born of a woman requires something other than teleportation.

No one said this belief equated teleportation.  That's your own polemical presupposition.

It's like an atheist who says that the Eucharist is cannibalism.  That's also their own presuppositions that we don't follow.

Christ was truly human, and truly a man with a Y chromosome.  He was born of a virgin woman who had no Y chromosome to provide for Him.  What does that tell you?

" and behold a luminous cloud overshadowed the cave. And the midwife said: My soul has been magnified this day, because my eyes have seen strange things— because salvation has been brought forth to Israel. And immediately the cloud disappeared out of the cave, and a great light shone in the cave, so that the eyes could not bear it. And in a little that light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared, and went and took the breast from His mother Mary"

In what way is this not teleportation?

It could be Christ miraculously moving through the her flesh without disturbing it.
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline William T

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,498
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antioch
Re: A Rabbit Trail
« Reply #113 on: May 25, 2016, 12:06:17 AM »
I've heard two Orthodox answers:

1) He could've gotten married but didn't due to His calling and  mission, it wouldn't have been right to put a wife and family through that.

2) The Church is the Bride, so no.

Either way, it tends not to be the same arguments for or against marriage a Catholic or Protestant would give.  I'll try to dig up the sources if you want me to expound more on these lines of thought.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2016, 12:07:02 AM by William T »