Topic: Panentheism in Orthodox Christianity

[Matthew777]

I found this to be highly interesting:

"The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches have a doctrine called panentheism to describe the relationship between the Uncreated (God, who is omnipotent, eternal, and constant) and His creation that bears surface similarities with the panentheism described above but maintains a critical distinction.

Most specifically, these Churches teach that God is not the "watchmaker God" of the Western European Enlightenment. Likewise, they teach that God is not the "stage magician God" who only shows up when performing miracles. Instead, the teaching of both these Churches is that God is not merely necessary to have created the universe, but that His active presence is necessary in some way for every bit of creation, from smallest to greatest, to continue to exist at all. That is, God's energies maintain all things and all beings, even if those beings have explicitly rejected Him. His love of creation is such that he will not withdraw His presence, which would be the ultimate form of slaughter, not merely imposing death but ending existence, altogether. By this token, the entirety of creation is sanctified, and thus no part of creation can be considered innately evil except as a result, direct or indirect, of the Fall of man or similar active rebellion against God."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panenth...n_Christianity

This explains how "The Kingdom of God is within you".

Peace.

[Asteriktos]

While Bp. Kallistos has used the term to describe the Orthodox view, I am wary of the term. The term has been used in questionable ways, and is a possible source of confusion. Certainly our understanding of panentheism is radically different than that of Marcus Borg, or some of the unorthodox interpretations and speculations based on things like the spurious Gospel of Thomas (Saying 77). While I think it is a good starting point, I also think it important that it be a term that is very precisely defined, to avoid confusion.

[Bizzlebin]

I have known of panentheism for some time, and it has been very influential in developing my theology. As for defining it, Asteriktos, I agree, but this is little different from many other Orthodox terms that can have a very un-Orthoox meaning, such as deification, for example. Nonetheless, I am glad to see that both EO and OO share this belief.

[ozgeorge]

Matthew Fox's "Creation Centred Spirituality" for which he was deposed and excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church is also based on an erroneous interpretation of panentheism. He's now Episcopalian I think.

[Matthew777]

Jesus is "God, with us". It's amazing realizing that God is with us and within us in every place and at all times. It's quite humbling.

Peace.

[jnorm888]

While Bp. Kallistos has used the term to describe the Orthodox view, I am wary of the term. The term has been used in questionable ways, and is a possible source of confusion. Certainly our understanding of panentheism is radically different than that of Marcus Borg, or some of the unorthodox interpretations and speculations based on things like the spurious Gospel of Thomas (Saying 77). While I think it is a good starting point, I also think it important that it be a term that is very precisely defined, to avoid confusion.

It's an excellent term. No confusion at all......well, that's if you understand it the way Orthodox Christians do. When I read Bp. Kallistos book about that back in 2001 (back when I was still protestant). It blew my mind, and I believed it wholeheartedly. It made perfect sense.

I think the western views is what is confusing. It opens up the door for Agnosticism and Atheism.


I was blessed when I first came to know about PANENTHEISM. It saved me from a world of Atheism, Agnosticism, and inconsistant western Theism.......the one that tends to stress God being way out there somewhere, and nature right here.







JNORM888

[Jetavan]

I found this to be highly interesting:

"The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches have a doctrine called panentheism to describe the relationship between the Uncreated (God, who is omnipotent, eternal, and constant) and His creation that bears surface similarities with the panentheism described above but maintains a critical distinction.

Most specifically, these Churches teach that God is not the "watchmaker God" of the Western European Enlightenment. Likewise, they teach that God is not the "stage magician God" who only shows up when performing miracles. Instead, the teaching of both these Churches is that God is not merely necessary to have created the universe, but that His active presence is necessary in some way for every bit of creation, from smallest to greatest, to continue to exist at all. That is, God's energies maintain all things and all beings, even if those beings have explicitly rejected Him. His love of creation is such that he will not withdraw His presence, which would be the ultimate form of slaughter, not merely imposing death but ending existence, altogether. By this token, the entirety of creation is sanctified, and thus no part of creation can be considered innately evil except as a result, direct or indirect, of the Fall of man or similar active rebellion against God."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panenth...n_Christianity

This explains how "The Kingdom of God is within you".

Peace.

Panentheism, in its most basic form, posits that Theos is neither merely transcendent to the cosmos, nor merely immanent, identical, or derivative of the cosmos; but that Theos is both transcendent of the cosmos and immanent (or within, or pervading) the cosmos.

The description of panentheism in the O.P. seems actually to be a description of "occasionalism", which posits that Theos is the sustaining cause of each and every moment of the cosmos' existence, as if the Theos were in fact creating the cosmos at each, smallest unit of time.

[Marc1152]

Oh my..This has long been a pet interest of mine. I am so happy we are discussing it.

Here is the basic formulation of panentheism: "All is in God and God is in all".

The danger is that it is pretty easy to slip into a type of Gnosticism which would claim : "We are all divine deep down on the inside and merely need to bring out and realize our likeness to God"

On the other hand, when we consume the Eucharist  we are "taking in" God ( God on the inside in a literal sense)and have achieved  something like Panentheism, but that is only through our will and desire to be "joined with" God ( Baptism too). But I am not sure creation is naturally a Panenthiestic arrangement . I don't know and I am anxious to discuss this more.

Hieromonk Damascene, ( Biographer of Fr. Serephim Rose and abbot of the Monestary Fr. Serephim founded in Plantina) wrote a long treatise about Panenthiesm about two years ago. I unfortunately lost the newsletter before reading it carefully. Perhaps someone can find it. I think his analysis would be very authoritative.   

[Incognito777]

As an Orthodox believer, I have serious reservations about Panentheism, because it is not a philosophically defensible system, and is contrary to classical Christian theism. It appears to me that the Orthodox invented their own form of Panentheism, which is not found in any text books in history, or any philosophical or religious thinker in all of human history. But I could be wrong. I think that the same philosophical arguments against classical Panentheism would also apply to the Orthodox reinvention of this concept. If you come across Father Damascenes article on this topic, please let me know.

[Incognito777]

A Panentheist god is not a maximally great being, and consequently cannot be the Christian God. The highest conceivable being (God) cannot have evil existing within himself. All false religions and philosophies fail to distinguish between Creator and creature. The god of Panentheism is a creature. Panentheism is found in Buddhism and Hinduism. The Panentheist god is not the Yahweh of biblical Christianity.

[Mor Ephrem]

But I could be wrong.

[NicholasMyra]

Incognito, panentheism is a vague word, but you clearly have a particular understanding in mind. You say panentheism contradicts classical theism and entails evil in God. Why?

[Incognito777]

"Men must avoid entering into sexual relations on Sundays and feast days in order to not give birth to handicapped children."

St George Karslides"

Did he really say that? Talk about superstitious nonsense. It implies sex is bad, and that somehow God is unhappy if people have sex on those days. But God never said a word about this. Please give me a reference for the quote.

[Mor Ephrem]

"Men must avoid entering into sexual relations on Sundays and feast days in order to not give birth to handicapped children."

St George Karslides"

Did he really say that? Talk about superstitious nonsense. It implies sex is bad, and that somehow God is unhappy if people have sex on those days. But God never said a word about this. Please give me a reference for the quote.

It doesn't imply sex is bad, it implies intemperance is bad (which it is, however you feel about "marital fasting"). 

[Minnesotan]

A Panentheist god is not a maximally great being, and consequently cannot be the Christian God. The highest conceivable being (God) cannot have evil existing within himself. All false religions and philosophies fail to distinguish between Creator and creature. The god of Panentheism is a creature. Panentheism is found in Buddhism and Hinduism. The Panentheist god is not the Yahweh of biblical Christianity.

Whenever I hear the phrase "...the Yahweh of biblical Christianity", for some reason, it sounds like something a fundamental Protestant or a Calvinist would say.

As far as "...highest conceivable being" goes, isn't that a buzzword of scholasticism (which also made its way into Calvinism, too)?

Not saying Incognito is a Calvinist, but if he hadn't already identified himself as Orthodox, I would have assumed he was one based on these comments alone.

[Incognito777]

Nicholas,

I already gave some reasons. The Panentheist god is not the highest conceivable being and not a maximally great being (not the Yahweh of Scripture).  Panentheism teaches that the universe is inside God, and consequently evil and the devil are in God, which is impossible for the highest conceivable being of classical theism. Also, it would mean that God cannot think faster than the speed of light since the universe is inside him. There are several problems with Panentheism, and I can recommend numerous books refuting it. Some schools of Wicca, Buddhism and Hinduism believe in Panentheism. In the case of Wicca, the universe is inside the goddess.  That Wiccan's believe in Panetheism, see Hawkins, "Witchcraft: Exploring the World of Wicca," pp. 34, 35.

Excuse me, but how can the Orthodox be closer to Wicca than Thomas Aquinas and the Christian Bible? Admittedly, Wiccan's accept the goddess, but nevertheless, the parallel is creepy, even though the Orthodox put their own twist on Panentheism. I'm assuming that the philosophical arguments against Panentheism would also apply to the Orthodox version, but this is what I am trying to find out.

The Panentheist god is the god of pagan Greek philosophers, not biblical theists. Here is more information against Panentheism.

Matt Slick on Panentheism
https://carm.org/panentheism

Dr. William Lane Craig on Panentheism
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/panentheism

A more detailed refutation of Panentheism by Dr. Norman Geisler
https://www.jashow.org/articles/uncategorized/panentheism-part-1/

Geisler has a whole section on Panentheism in his "Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics," page 576. You might also see chapter 12 of his book, "Christian Apologetics." (second edition), and the following:

Geisler, The Battle for God: Responding to the Challenge of Neotheism;
Gruenler, "The Inexahustable God: Biblical Faith and the Challenge of Process Theology":
Own, "Concepts of Deity"
Brown, "Process Theology and Christian Thought."

[Incognito777]

Whenever I hear the phrase "...the Yahweh of biblical Christianity", for some reason, it sounds like something a fundamental Protestant or a Calvinist would say.

I know, because most Orthodox are biblically illiterate. There's no such thing as "Fundamentalist." You either believe the teachings of Holy Scripture or you don't.

As far as "...highest conceivable being" goes, isn't that a buzzword of scholasticism (which also made its way into Calvinism, too)?

Let me ask: Do you believe God is the highest conceivable being? If you are worshiping anything other than the highest conceivable being, then you are committing idolatry.

[NicholasMyra]

I already gave some reasons.

You did, but they were floating reasons, disconnected from a definition of panentheism and an explanation of why, according to that definition, panentheism entails the bad things we don't want.

Panentheism teaches that the universe is inside God

So here's your vague definition, which does sound a little weird. But panentheism can also mean that God is in all of the world. That is what our theologians seem to mean. This does not contradict Classical Theism. In fact, in our tradition, we often talk about God being everywhere present and filling all things. I don't think panentheism is a helpful word, but I would think the following theses are inescapable for Orthodox Christians:

1. God's Activity is a direct necessary cause for all effects.
2. The existence of any existent at any time depends upon God's Activity at that time. (I think this is specific of 1.)
3. God is co-located with all things and "in" all things, whatever that means.

Hard to get around those during a Liturgy without crossing your fingers.

consequently evil and the devil are in God

So back to "Panentheism teaches that the universe [and hence evil] is inside God." What does it mean to be in God or inside of God? In God's essence? In God's body? In some sort of field of God's generative and vivifying Activities? If the latter, this does not seem to impact God's goodness; rather He is more good and humble and powerful for it.

You may be critiquing a "process" view of panentheism, where God has an immanent being which is created and participates in the fallen world. You cited something involving the process view. This is a heterodox panentheism which is only what it is against a background of other commitments that we Orthodox do not share. Fr. Thomas Hopko wrote his dissertation on this topic if you're interested.

Also, it would mean that God cannot think faster than the speed of light since the universe is inside him.

There are a lot of problems with this. Why can't God consist of more than the universe according to your definition of panentheism? Is the universe in God's mind? Why? Why wouldn't God be able to think faster than light within the universe if God isn't a material body? 

[NicholasMyra]

Let me ask: Do you believe God is the highest conceivable being?

No, because the highest conceivable being would be incorporatable into my conceptual totality, and the true God is not fully incorporatable into my conceptual totality. In a funny way Anselm was right with his ontological argument, although not as a proof for God's existence.

[biro]

Nicholas,

I already gave some reasons. The Panentheist god is not the highest conceivable being and not a maximally great being (not the Yahweh of Scripture).  Panentheism teaches that the universe is inside God, and consequently evil and the devil are in God, which is impossible for the highest conceivable being of classical theism. Also, it would mean that God cannot think faster than the speed of light since the universe is inside him. There are several problems with Panentheism, and I can recommend numerous books refuting it. Some schools of Wicca, Buddhism and Hinduism believe in Panentheism. In the case of Wicca, the universe is inside the goddess.  That Wiccan's believe in Panetheism, see Hawkins, "Witchcraft: Exploring the World of Wicca," pp. 34, 35.

Excuse me, but how can the Orthodox be closer to Wicca than Thomas Aquinas and the Christian Bible? Admittedly, Wiccan's accept the goddess, but nevertheless, the parallel is creepy, even though the Orthodox put their own twist on Panentheism. I'm assuming that the philosophical arguments against Panentheism would also apply to the Orthodox version, but this is what I am trying to find out.

The Panentheist god is the god of pagan Greek philosophers, not biblical theists. Here is more information against Panentheism.

Matt Slick on Panentheism
https://carm.org/panentheism

Dr. William Lane Craig on Panentheism
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/panentheism

A more detailed refutation of Panentheism by Dr. Norman Geisler
https://www.jashow.org/articles/uncategorized/panentheism-part-1/

Geisler has a whole section on Panentheism in his "Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics," page 576. You might also see chapter 12 of his book, "Christian Apologetics." (second edition), and the following:

Geisler, The Battle for God: Responding to the Challenge of Neotheism;
Gruenler, "The Inexahustable God: Biblical Faith and the Challenge of Process Theology":
Own, "Concepts of Deity"
Brown, "Process Theology and Christian Thought."

Wasn't aware Craig or any of these other people were Orthodox.

Why do you draw on Protestants?

[Fabio Leite]

To say that the devil is self-existent is to put him on equal foot with God.

Everything that exists has to exist as non mixing participation in the very existence of God - just like being on a plane can impart on you the speed of the plane while you don't become a plane or the plane itself - as the extremist deification jumper found out for some seconds.

It's not that Orthodoxy is close to Wicca. Wicca is usually the new age, post modern digestion of a romantic perspective on paganism.

Serious paganism, on the other, hand, the ancient thing practiced before Christianity, had many insights that were true or at least partially true, and that's why Greek philosophy and some other concepts were eventually perfected within the Church.

[seekeroftruth777]

Nicholas,

I already gave some reasons. The Panentheist god is not the highest conceivable being and not a maximally great being (not the Yahweh of Scripture).  Panentheism teaches that the universe is inside God, and consequently evil and the devil are in God, which is impossible for the highest conceivable being of classical theism. Also, it would mean that God cannot think faster than the speed of light since the universe is inside him. There are several problems with Panentheism, and I can recommend numerous books refuting it. Some schools of Wicca, Buddhism and Hinduism believe in Panentheism. In the case of Wicca, the universe is inside the goddess.  That Wiccan's believe in Panetheism, see Hawkins, "Witchcraft: Exploring the World of Wicca," pp. 34, 35.

Excuse me, but how can the Orthodox be closer to Wicca than Thomas Aquinas and the Christian Bible? Admittedly, Wiccan's accept the goddess, but nevertheless, the parallel is creepy, even though the Orthodox put their own twist on Panentheism. I'm assuming that the philosophical arguments against Panentheism would also apply to the Orthodox version, but this is what I am trying to find out.

The Panentheist god is the god of pagan Greek philosophers, not biblical theists. Here is more information against Panentheism.

Matt Slick on Panentheism
https://carm.org/panentheism

Dr. William Lane Craig on Panentheism
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/panentheism

A more detailed refutation of Panentheism by Dr. Norman Geisler
https://www.jashow.org/articles/uncategorized/panentheism-part-1/

Geisler has a whole section on Panentheism in his "Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics," page 576. You might also see chapter 12 of his book, "Christian Apologetics." (second edition), and the following:

Geisler, The Battle for God: Responding to the Challenge of Neotheism;
Gruenler, "The Inexahustable God: Biblical Faith and the Challenge of Process Theology":
Own, "Concepts of Deity"
Brown, "Process Theology and Christian Thought."

Wasn't aware Craig or any of these other people were Orthodox.

Why do you draw on Protestants?

thanks biro for pointing that out! he also drawsfrom reformation/evangelical sources a lot on his youtube videos as well. Most his videos seemed aimed at bashing Orthodoxy, spefically heirarchy and old calendarists. He even called the church fathers liars before. Don't listen to him folks he always pushing protestant ideas like sola scriptura, and Israel/Jews as god chosen while Russia the antichrist.  He even said some things in Orthodoxy are man made like kissing a priest hand then call. His videos are under true christian videos if you want to see what i'm talking about.

[NicholasMyra]

What youtube videos?

[Incognito777]

He even called the church fathers liars before.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but they were liars. As a Christian, I believe integrity is very important. The Church Fathers were not always honest, ethical or educated. Listen to this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh65VvPhJcY

I'm not playing these games of shifting the focus, slander and red herrings. I reference the best and most scholarly sources available to man. If you don't like it, you can leave.

Don't listen to him folks he always pushing protestant ideas like sola scriptura

Cite your source liar. See? The Orthodox lie if it suits their purpose. This spirit of lying and slander go all the way back to the patristics.

and Israel/Jews as god chosen while Russia the antichrist.

Cite your source. I do believe Russians are racists and abuse their own people, but I have never called them antichrist.

He even said some things in Orthodoxy are man made like kissing a priest hand then call.

If it's not located in Scripture or apostolic tradition, then it IS man-made. There is NO evidence that the apostles ever instructed Christians to bow before and kiss the hands of clergy. If you disagree, cite a source.

I'm not playing these kind of games. Panentheism is completely pagan. Nicholas even admitted that he is not worshiping the highest conceivable being. So he believes there is a being higher than God. This is pagan and total idolatry.

Panentheism is not philosophically defensible. It's the pagan deity of Plato and Heraclitus, not the God of Abraham.

[Incognito777]

I new it would only be a matter of time that someone would attack my sources and the authors of the articles I linked to. This is nothing but an Ad Hominem. And I am simply not playing these kind of games. Engage the arguments.

[christiane777]

“The whole earth is a living icon of the face of God.”

— St. John of Damascus

[Incognito777]

One thing the modern Orthodox lie about, is that Christians always venerated icons. This is an absolute lie. Originally the veneration of icons was tabu in the Church, and even after Constantine, was considered a continued influence of pagan thought. Eusebius, for example, rejected any pictorial representation, even of the humanity of Christ. Epiphanius of Salamis considered the veneration of icons to be a new form of idolatry. As in paganism, the Christians came to believe that images had a prophylactic and miraculous effect.  Leo III came from the Christian Semitic tradition, which had reservations about the veneration of images. Leo and the Christian semites allowed biblical pictures, but not veneration. St. Irene defended the veneration of images, but she came from the Greek heartlands, and was influenced by monks, many of whom made a living from making icons.

In this video, David Bercot explains how ancient apologists lied about images.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh65VvPhJcY

I'm sure the Orthodox will now go and attack Bercot, instead of engaging his arguments.

[Incognito777]

The god of Panentheism is finite: high on the finite scale of being, but not at the infinite level. The God of biblical Christianity is pure actuality with no unrealized potentialities. He does not grow, learn, expand, or develop. If Christians are worshiping anyone other than the classical God of biblical theism, than they are worshiping a pagan deity. Read the information in the links I cited.

[NicholasMyra]

So are you going to respond to my post?

To all readers: Do not get pulled into the side tangents about icons, veneration, etc. Only address the panentheism stuff and whatever falls out from it.

[Fabio Leite]

There is NO evidence that the apostles ever instructed Christians to bow before and kiss the hands of clergy. If you disagree, cite a source.

14 "If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. 15 For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you. 16 Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him. 17 If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them."
Saint John 13

God did not think it was below Him to wash a sinner's foot, but you think it's below you to kiss a senior's hand... right...

He also did praise a prostitute for washing His feet with her hair and tears. But you can bet that if a kid was to kiss the hand of an older apostle as was the costume of kissing hands to show respect, Christ would have cursed this evil habit.

I'm not playing these kind of games.

You play games of words and lie with truths and half-truths, the worst kind of lie.

Panentheism is not philosophically defensible. It's the pagan deity of Plato

You have to choose one of the above, you can't have the two of them. Either it is the belief of one of the most important philosophers of history who therefore defended it philosophically (and it would make it the most defensible philosophical theism at least), or it was not spoused by Plato.

Also, how can metaphysical hypothesis be anyone's deity, instead of an assumption about the relations between the deity and the world?

Finally, the pagans also created the mathematical language used in this evil pagan artifact you are using.



Binary numbers, of particular importance for this demonic tool, were created by Leibniz from his studies of the pagan spiritual (sometimes used for divination) book I Ching. How do you feel you are using a Chinese divination tool every time you use the computer?

[christiane777]

I believe that when one properly venerates an icon, he venerates the holiness depicted by (or through) the image of the icon, never the actual image or icon itself.  To worship the actual image or icon is idolatry.  Think of the icon as a window to the sacred.

This is important with respect to pantheism as well.  To worship earth as God is different from worshipping God through creation.  Seeing God in creation is profoundly Christian (Orthodox and otherwise).

Romans 1:20:  For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Per St. Paul, not only is God's divinity discernible in his work of creation, the Christian "has no excuse" but to perceive Him in this manner.  Just don't stop there; what you see is the handiwork of God, who is beyond creation (and infusing it).

The New Testament teaches that God loves us so much that He sent Christ to become a human being. Christ came in order to save us, and to give us a chance to come back to God again. He became matter just as we are. Because God became a man in Christ, this physical world has begun to be reunited with the heavenly world again. Matter has started to regain its full glory. Christ has shown us that human flesh can become filled with God. He was physical matter that was God bearing. In the same way all physical matter can become filled with God's presence. This happens to the saints, to the water at a baptism, or to the bread and wine for Holy Communion. It can also happen to the wood and paint of an Icon.  (Or to a tree or flower.)

[JamesRottnek]

The god of Panentheism is finite: high on the finite scale of being, but not at the infinite level. The God of biblical Christianity is pure actuality with no unrealized potentialities. He does not grow, learn, expand, or develop. If Christians are worshiping anyone other than the classical God of biblical theism Greek philosophy, than they are worshiping a pagan deity. Read the information in the links I cited.

Fixed that

[biro]

One thing the modern Orthodox lie about, is that Christians always venerated icons. This is an absolute lie. Originally the veneration of icons was tabu in the Church, and even after Constantine, was considered a continued influence of pagan thought. Eusebius, for example, rejected any pictorial representation, even of the humanity of Christ. Epiphanius of Salamis considered the veneration of icons to be a new form of idolatry. As in paganism, the Christians came to believe that images had a prophylactic and miraculous effect.  Leo III came from the Christian Semitic tradition, which had reservations about the veneration of images. Leo and the Christian semites allowed biblical pictures, but not veneration. St. Irene defended the veneration of images, but she came from the Greek heartlands, and was influenced by monks, many of whom made a living from making icons.

In this video, David Bercot explains how ancient apologists lied about images.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh65VvPhJcY

I'm sure the Orthodox will now go and attack Bercot, instead of engaging his arguments.

You know what the Orthodox believe about icons. Bercot isn't going to change them.

Are you Protestant now?

[NicholasMyra]

Are you Protestant now?

Faith interrogation gets us nowhere. Besides, this is Free-For-All.

[biro]

Are you Protestant now?

Faith interrogation gets us nowhere. Besides, this is Free-For-All.

He's citing iconoclast Protestants and an iconoclast Pope on an Orthodox forum. I think we are allowed to ask why.

Free-for-all means I get to ask questions too.

[seekeroftruth777]

Are you Protestant now?

Faith interrogation gets us nowhere. Besides, this is Free-For-All.

He's citing iconoclast Protestants and an iconoclast Pope on an Orthodox forum. I think we are allowed to ask why.

Free-for-all means I get to ask questions too.

Biro right on this one, also don't anyone think it wired this gentlemen is always supporting protestant/reformationist ideas while at times bashing Orthodoxy, yet he claims to be "apart of the mainstreme Orthodox Church. I think it fair that Biro get to ask the hard questions.

[wgw]

On the subject of panentheism, would I be correct in saying the panentheism of process theology is essentially incompatible with Orthodoxy.

[Minnesotan]

What youtube videos?

I tried Googling "Incognito777" to see if I could find the videos he was talking about, but all that came up was a Nietzsche-quoting Twitter account, someone on an investing website, someone who plays online chess, someone on InterracialDatingCentral.com, and the OC.Net thread on whether Christians can enter pagan temples or not. Does he post his YouTube videos under a different screenname?

By the way, does anyone think it's an interesting coincidence that no fewer than three posters on this thread have "777" in their names? Maybe we should all start adding 777 to our own names. How does Minnesotan777 or wgw777 sound?

[NicholasMyra]

It is the symbolic number of completeness/infinity, perhaps their anticipated postcounts.

[biro]

What youtube videos?

I tried Googling "Incognito777" to see if I could find the videos he was talking about, but all that came up was a Nietzsche-quoting Twitter account, someone on an investing website, someone who plays online chess, someone on InterracialDatingCentral.com, and the OC.Net thread on whether Christians can enter pagan temples or not. Does he post his YouTube videos under a different screenname?

By the way, does anyone think it's an interesting coincidence that no fewer than three posters on this thread have "777" in their names? Maybe we should all start adding 777 to our own names. How does Minnesotan777 or wgw777 sound?

Are they all the same guy? 

[Minnesotan]

What youtube videos?

I tried Googling "Incognito777" to see if I could find the videos he was talking about, but all that came up was a Nietzsche-quoting Twitter account, someone on an investing website, someone who plays online chess, someone on InterracialDatingCentral.com, and the OC.Net thread on whether Christians can enter pagan temples or not. Does he post his YouTube videos under a different screenname?

By the way, does anyone think it's an interesting coincidence that no fewer than three posters on this thread have "777" in their names? Maybe we should all start adding 777 to our own names. How does Minnesotan777 or wgw777 sound?

Are they all the same guy? 

I doubt it; it seems like it'd be a fairly common screenname and there are probably several different people using it.

Somehow I don't think our Incognito is likely to be a Nietzsche fan, for instance.

[wgw]

What youtube videos?

I tried Googling "Incognito777" to see if I could find the videos he was talking about, but all that came up was a Nietzsche-quoting Twitter account, someone on an investing website, someone who plays online chess, someone on InterracialDatingCentral.com, and the OC.Net thread on whether Christians can enter pagan temples or not. Does he post his YouTube videos under a different screenname?

By the way, does anyone think it's an interesting coincidence that no fewer than three posters on this thread have "777" in their names? Maybe we should all start adding 777 to our own names. How does Minnesotan777 or wgw777 sound?

I did once append my name with a Boeing model number, but not the 777.  I do like triple sevens though, particularly the rather sexeh 777-300ER.

Edit: you know I suppose Minnesotan that we might request ournusernames be modified just for the pure heck of it.  We should attempt to persuade Mor Ephrem, biro, and NicholasMyra to join us, for maximum comic value.  Just imagine:  Mor Ephrem777, biro777, NicholasMyra777; in this manner most remaining active members on this thread would have names ending in 777.

[wgw]

Note on the subject of the OP, Raphael Lassater is a nice enough chap and I have had e-mail dialogues with him.  Interestingly his "atheism" he described as pantheistic.   It is my intention at some point to mirror the public domain content he had on the Peshitta (excluding the somewhat dubious Lamsa Bible which is under copyright) elsewhere, as I am rather fond of the Murdock translation.

I do not know if he is "Incognito777;" I wouod assume from my conversation with him that he would not really care what we think about iconography at this point.

[wgw]

There is NO evidence that the apostles ever instructed Christians to bow before and kiss the hands of clergy. If you disagree, cite a source.

14 "If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. 15 For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you. 16 Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him. 17 If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them."
Saint John 13

God did not think it was below Him to wash a sinner's foot, but you think it's below you to kiss a senior's hand... right...

He also did praise a prostitute for washing His feet with her hair and tears. But you can bet that if a kid was to kiss the hand of an older apostle as was the costume of kissing hands to show respect, Christ would have cursed this evil habit.

I'm not playing these kind of games.

You play games of words and lie with truths and half-truths, the worst kind of lie.

Panentheism is not philosophically defensible. It's the pagan deity of Plato

You have to choose one of the above, you can't have the two of them. Either it is the belief of one of the most important philosophers of history who therefore defended it philosophically (and it would make it the most defensible philosophical theism at least), or it was not spoused by Plato.

Also, how can metaphysical hypothesis be anyone's deity, instead of an assumption about the relations between the deity and the world?

Finally, the pagans also created the mathematical language used in this evil pagan artifact you are using.



Binary numbers, of particular importance for this demonic tool, were created by Leibniz from his studies of the pagan spiritual (sometimes used for divination) book I Ching. How do you feel you are using a Chinese divination tool every time you use the computer?

It's coincidental that computers are binary; there were in the early uears some trinary and indeed decimal based systems, and also an interesting creature known as the "analog computer", but these died off for reasons relating to efficiency.  That said, several UNIX hackers of note, such as Eric S. Raymond, are into the occult in a huge way.

[PeterTheAleut]

"Men must avoid entering into sexual relations on Sundays and feast days in order to not give birth to handicapped children."

St George Karslides"

Did he really say that? Talk about superstitious nonsense. It implies sex is bad, and that somehow God is unhappy if people have sex on those days. But God never said a word about this. Please give me a reference for the quote.

How is that relevant to the topic of this thread?