Orthodox Christianity Apologetics Q&A

Author: Mopac

Posts

Total: 219
#121
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
Yeah can you imagine it?
And you worship the alleged character who allegedly created that system.
How fuckin' hilarious is that?
And you call that thing LOVE..........bahahahahahajha
#122
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
They're both fictional!
#123
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
They're both unending with no escape possible.  Don't you think heaven would be boring?
#124
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@keithprosser
No. Boring is the modern word for slothfulness. Boredom is the result of laziness.  I can think of nothing more delightful than worshiping God. An eternity of doing so is too short. 

But let us put a different perspective on it. Right now in this world, people can either worship God or worship something else. Even if you don't believe in The Deity, everyone believes in a deity. It is really a matter of who is that deity. for the atheist, the deity is the person they see when they look in a mirror. That is the one who they believe controls their destiny and is the master of their own fate.  That is the one who is their final authority and the one who decides what is right and wrong - that is how the Bible describes the person who has become like god. And I agree with this definition over and above the secular definition that god is a supernatural being or principle. 

So if this is the perspective right now - of course the atheist or agnostic is going to find heaven not to their liking. After all, everyone will not be worshiping them or listening to them or bowing their knee to them, not even themselves. It would sound like a pitiful existence. Hence why Hell is reserved for them. 

On the other hand - for people such as myself - who in one sense believe that everything we do is for the glory of God - right now - spending eternity doing so with the same ideals is really only going to fulfill what we are doing here. How could it be boring? You talk of repetition as though it is bad. Why? You don't seem to have a problem with socialism - which is really getting rid of competition or indeed variety. But Heaven - like life on earth is full of variety. It is not as though heaven is about sitting on clouds singing songs. That might be part of it - and if it was - so what? That would be fantastic. But I highly doubt that it is going to be like that. My view is that God who is creative has a much greater variety of things for his beloved children to attend to do. But even if it is not - it will be a glorious place. 

Eternity is something which is unfathomable for us humans to get our head around. We have beginnings and we have ends. This is part and parcel of what it means to be contained in our planet and existence. We read our science-fiction books like Dr Who or the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy or the marvel comics and get a perspective of eternity or longevity - immortality based on a human or a robot living a long time. What else can we think of really - but it is a human perspective that misses the divine perspective of eternity. God is not getting older. God is not bored. And this is even though he is omniscient and all powerful and eternal. Indeed he is holy - which many people think is boring by definition. Yet, this is not the perspective we receive when we read the Scriptures. 

I think the best thing about heaven is the fact that we will be with Jesus. He is the only one I really want to see up there. And if he was not there then it would not be heaven. 
#125
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@keithprosser
And why would anyone want to escape from heaven? After all, heaven is not something that people are trapped in? And are you suggesting it is an eternal place - with no boundaries? Or a time? An after life? And what do you say about death? It is a place - you cannot escape from. It is neverending - and dead people cannot rise from the dead. 

So if heaven is boring based on that criteria - your alternate ultimate end is worse anyway. And much more boring. And inescapable. Death - unending nothingness. No escape. No anything. 


#126
Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,250
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
-->
@Mopac
Is there anything the Orthodox church can do to make itself less...ethnically exclusive? Is the larger church taking concrete action now to give itself a broader appeal? If not, why not?
#127
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mopac

Protestantism is not defined by schisms. I have already addressed this above. Protestants protested against the authority of Rome and for the authority of the Bible. There is basically one Reformed church - albeit containing numerous denomination - from the episcopal, Lutheran, and Presbyterians groups.  Baptists are not traditionally protestant - but rather dissenters.

One reformed church? Authority of the bible? That is a pretty bold claim. Presbytarians? They are Calvanists! How obnoxious that must be to a Methodist. And I know it is, because I am good friends with a Methodist pastor. We Orthodox do have that in common. On that note, I know this one Methodist church where they refer to God as "mother" during service and the clergy are all openly homosexual. Wild, eh? Lutherans? Are you talking about the Martin Luther who added words to his translation of the bible to justify his salvation by grace alone theology? Are you talking about the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America(the largest by the way) that conducts marriages between same sex couples within its walls? 

I know a man who was a Lutheran pastor for over 20 years. He is an Orthodox now. It happened, like many of the other former pastors at my parish, after they got some education. It happened to me too! One of our deacons was an Episcopalian pastor for just as long.

But no, there is no one reformed church. That is a claim that I don't believe can be backed up. And even now, there are new denominations popping up. A relatively new denomination has sprang up in the last couple of decades in my city.. They have churches all over town. I presume this is because they can't get along with the established churches. 
In Australia the Methodists formed a new church with the Presbyterians. It took three churches and made one new one. the older churches to a large extent becoming redundant. Calvinism is simply Augustinian in essence anyway. Even the orthodox church accepts his teaching as one of the early doctors in the church.  The Methodists derive from the Episcopalian church - and never sought to become its own denomination. To be perfectly honest - the Episcopalian Church is a broad church and both Calvinism and Wesley's disciples are able to fit quite comfortably within its ranks. 

As for the Lutheran Church, yes protestant. Yet, like the Episcopalian church, the RCC, and the OC maintain the fictional apostolic succession. As for people leaving one denomination and going to another - woopy doo. It happens with all denominations and across all denominations. We have people in our congregation who were baptised in the Orthodox church and are now Presbyterian. They have left what they called a hate filled and superstitious - even attaching witchcraft to it, and found people who love and care for them.  Having met their parents, I understand their views. Yet, like I said I am not of the view that the OC has no Christians in it. One of my mentors is a lecturer in one of their seminaries. I lived next door to a OC priest for 10 years and very often shared lunch and conversations together. I would count him as a close friend. He would often leave his children and grandchildren in my care and even permit them to attend at our church. So either he is a good orthodox or he is a liberal? What do you reckon? 

I also see the great variety of denominations as one of the most amazing things that provides real unity to the Church. Rather than seeing it something negative which is what many people - especially the atheists - do - I think it is one of our chief strengths. When Christians can disagree with fundamental aspects of their religion yet still unite on the primary truths of the Gospel, this signals tolerance of the greatest virtue - something which the rest of the world tends to fall behind in all over the place. The only time we see unity of any kind in the world apart from what the church brings - is either in times of great tragedy or the Olympics. Sports tends to act as an equaliser yet - it only goes so far. It is the unity that the world sees of the church when it comes together that is staggering. If the church had only one opinion - it could not demonstrate unity - only sameness. This would place it in the realm of the cults or the sects. This is probably why the OC is often put into a the realm of brainwashing - and superstitious because of its sameness. Sameness is not unity. It is the blind leading the blind. Unity by virtue of its definition requires variety - and non-sameness or otherwise its loses its meaning. When people of different views can disagree and unite it reveals real love. 



#128
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mopac

It was the Orthodox church which was left the fold, not the West. 

Yet, the council of Ephesus in 431 (3rd ecumenical council) clearly ruled that anyone who alters the creed will be anathemized, and on that...
There is a clear implication that the creed could be altered if it were to improve its meaning - obviously no one at that time believed that the creed was equal to Scripture because no one was infallible like God. 

The OC had and still has issues with the roles of icons in its place. It also has strong links to Constantine. The RCC now has significant issues in respect of icons as well.  

Please also explain how sin is not necessarily a breach of God's covenant but rather a diminishing of God's image? 

#129
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mopac

This is the same as good works. If people can be saved by good works, then Jesus death and resurrection is meaningless.
Pelagianism was also recognized as a heresy at this same ecumenical council
So we should all be Calvinists then? 

Apostolic succession in the sense of "laying on of hands from the beginning" is a myth and a superstition. The only real sense of apostolic succession is in relation to the teaching of the Apostle's creed. Otherwise, Jesus' death on the cross gets lost in the hands of the traditionalists.
I don't know what you think I'm saying, but laying on of hands is something you see an awful lot in scripture, even in the context of appointing someone to an office. It happens in Acts when the Apostles appoints deacons. It happens when Barnabus and Paul were sent to be missionaries from Antioch. These are all just examples from the book of acts. If tradition was bad in itself, why does Paul write in his second letter to the Thessalonians to hold to the traditions?
The laying on of hands occurred several times in Scripture. I am not saying that laying on of hands is a myth. I am saying that the apostolic succession that both the RCC and the OC hold to is a superstition. The Holy Spirit is not communicated to us from God by the laying on off hands. The Spirit goes where it wills. There is no evidence that the apostles laid hands on James, a so called bishop of Jerusalem. The words in the Greek for Bishop and elder are interchangeable in every case. I am not against tradition per se. Yet when Scriptures disagrees with tradition - scripture prevails. Also there is no command to lay hands on persons - to set them aside as elders or bishops etc. These people are known by the character and their godliness and deeds. Not because they have had hands laid on them.  

The Orthodox Church has kept to Holy Tradition as other "churches" compromise to the prevailing culture.
Misleading. The OC just compromises to the cultures it exists in. It from the beginning - compromised to focus on icons of the surrounding pagan nations - not like God commanded the Jews to be rid off. Don't forget the OC continues to justify its reasons for breaking the second commandment. Probably like the RCC they simply try and delete it. 

If apostolic succession is simply the laying on of hands, then why bother with Jesus dying? Why did he not just lay hands on his apostles - and then get them to do the same? Why would he need to go to the cross?
Because simply touching someone with your hands doesn't do anything on its own, and no one is claiming this.
If that is true - then see how many people can become clergy in your church without the laying on of hands? Exactly zero. 

If you ask me, it is the so called orthodox church which is incomplete. Incomplete in relation to the Trinity. Incomplete in relation to salvation. Incomplete in relation to Jesus. Incomplete in relation to church history.


This is a pretty bold claim considering we actually remember what went on during the so called "dark ages", keep the writings of the church fathers, remember the saints, hold to the ancient monastic tradition, and take our religious education very seriously.

You really have nothing to back this up, it is the type of opinion that can only come from someone who is wholly unfamiliar with Orthodoxy. Well, that is why I am here. To educate.
The OC lacks a full and complete understanding of the Trinity. This is one of the reasons the church ex-communicated it. Go and read the council's minutes. Entertaining. And full of evidence.  The OC is incomplete in relation to salvation. It does not have a proper understanding of sin - hence it can never grasp why simply trying to restore the image is not enough. We don't want to become Adam in his perfect state again - we want to become like Jesus in his perfect state. The two are quite different. the practice of iconology simply confirms this fact. Reducing Jesus out of fear of not understanding his deity reveals an incompleteness. And looking at only one side of history by itself is incomplete. These are not just opinions dear mopac - it goes much deeper than this. 

#130
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@Tradesecret
And pray tell, what about Heaven is to be likened to Hell? 
1) god supposedly takes away all my darkness... which my darker emotions i've fallen in love with. I don't know who i would be without my darkness. 2) I will be undying and eternal. If you think being alive as an immortal would be heaven... all i can say is you just can't imagine it. Death is what makes life beautiful. Knowing there could be anything possible after death is what gives me hope. Without it, i would eventually go mad. Actually, being alive for eternity with no off switch scares the heck out of me the most. 3) if i find one love, i'll have to be with one women for the rest of eternity. 4) Everyone is nice all the time, everyone is loving all the time, everyone worships like everyday is Sunday church... that also sounds like a horror movie to me. 5) A lot of things i love to do, sleep with more than one partner, listen to music that sings about cannibalism, torment, death and chaos... all these things and some more i love... will be taken away from me. So not only will who i am be taken away from me, i have to put up with that and the implications for eternity. That my friend is hell but instead of fire and brimstone... it's hell but sunny. 

#131
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Outplayz
And pray tell, what about Heaven is to be likened to Hell? 
1) god supposedly takes away all my darkness... which my darker emotions i've fallen in love with. I don't know who i would be without my darkness. 2) I will be undying and eternal. If you think being alive as an immortal would be heaven... all i can say is you just can't imagine it. Death is what makes life beautiful. Knowing there could be anything possible after death is what gives me hope. Without it, i would eventually go mad. Actually, being alive for eternity with no off switch scares the heck out of me the most. 3) if i find one love, i'll have to be with one women for the rest of eternity. 4) Everyone is nice all the time, everyone is loving all the time, everyone worships like everyday is Sunday church... that also sounds like a horror movie to me. 5) A lot of things i love to do, sleep with more than one partner, listen to music that sings about cannibalism, torment, death and chaos... all these things and some more i love... will be taken away from me. So not only will who i am be taken away from me, i have to put up with that and the implications for eternity. That my friend is hell but instead of fire and brimstone... it's hell but sunny. 
LOL!

Your description of heaven is amusing if somewhat distorted for your own biases.  but looking at your responses one at a time:

1. living without darkness? Do you mean the darkness of emotions like hate and jealousy and envy? You are correct - you would not recognise yourself without these things. I am not sure what this has got to do with heaven though or why it then becomes like Hell?
2. undying and eternal.  I discussed this briefly above. I think humans have no idea what eternality is like and every attempt to make it about undying and immortality is unhelpful. I agree that I don't understand what it is like - but neither do you. you seem confused - how can knowing there is anything after death give you hope and yet the idea of no off switch scare you? I think that life - if that is the correct term in heaven is unlike anything we understand here. It is not a matter of an off switch - because that is a mortal term. Death is an unwelcome intrusion into our life. It does not make life beautiful. 
3. so you want no restrictions? and you would become bored, is that it? Jesus indicated that there wont be marriage in heaven anyway - so infidelity is not an issue. You seem to have a warped idea of heaven - it is not just an extension of earth. 
4. How do you know everyone is nice? And what is wrong with sunday worship? For me it is the highlight of my week. Yet, I don't think the bible gives us that kind of description anyway. there is going to be a lot of things to keep on doing.  Variety and creativity will be unbounded - and yet Heaven is not going to be an entertainment cruise ship - or a retirement home. IT is not Disney land. 
5. it seems that you misunderstand the bible. and I guess that is not surprising. I agree that if you want those things - then heaven really would be Hell for you.  Heaven is all about God - it is not about you. Yet, the alternatives are not going to give you those things either. Hell wont. So not only do you not get the things you desire - but you get tortured forever as well. And if there is no god - then you get death - an endless dismal darkness - with no escape - nothingness - no one remembering you. So, I find your comment about an after life - confusing as well as dismal. 

If I did not believe in God or Jesus, your alternative is not something I would embrace either. It sounds more like Hell than Hell.. 
#132
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@Mopac
and you don't get to be a bishop if you are chasing after filthy lucre!
I didn't even read the article but i just googled "Orthodox bishop caught" ... and a bunch of stuff came up and that's the first on my page. See, we are talking about humans. Humans are pretty crap animals. The worst thing is... some of the worst of humankind.. psychopaths and such, are really good at manipulating and getting to the top. 

They aren't really supposed to lord authority over people. 
They may not suppose to, but they are filthy human... and this attribute is the most popular. I would say at least 50%, and i'm sure i'm low-ballin, of any Orthodox person loves to lord over people. 

Our priests are not rich
I highly doubt this is true "in general." Again... it may be that your priest aren't "suppose" to be rich... but i highly doubt it's true that they aren't. Btw, is the pope Orthodox? I mean, he may not have the bank account, but he lives in a freaking castle. Just a joke, but in general ... humans are greedy Orthodox or not. 

Even if there are corrupt laymen, corrupt priests, corrupt bishops, these bad ones cannot corrupt the whole church because we take Holy Tradition very seriously.
Now... really, in regards to Orthodox belief holding their tradition and making it hard to corrupt it... i like your arguments bc they are fair. I mean, it makes sense that a belief that prides themselves to be the original and to hold on to that throughout the years will make it harder to corrupt it. But i still am not convinced it's hasn't been "at some point" corrupted or at the very least, used in a way to gain power and greed. 

But in any case, you gave me a good argument for why you don't think it is, and all i can do is assert it is... i can't really provide proof and i don't think you can prove otherwise. But really now, all of this comes down to the text itself. The text itself to me is corrupted bc humans wrote the Bible. Furthermore, humans picked which parts to keep in the Bible. And certain ignorance of the world today has me to believe the text itself is corrupted and fallible. Especially things like the homosexual or any of the sexual stuff in the Bible. That just 1) seems like what a straight guy would write. And 2) having only one wife was an important rule to make. I imagine without this tradition, all the women were either going to the richest, strongest, best looking guys. Without this assertion that you should be with one person, a lot of guys would be left without women. So the text itself sounds like human mumbo jumbo. 

#133
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@Tradesecret
1. living without darkness? Do you mean the darkness of emotions like hate and jealousy and envy? You are correct - you would not recognise yourself without these things. I am not sure what this has got to do with heaven though or why it then becomes like Hell?
Yes i am talking about my hate, fear, jealousy, manipulation, anger, etc. It becomes hell if those emotions are taken away from me. I don't want them erased or gone. They make me who i am. And, i like using them against others sometimes. 

2. undying and eternal.  I discussed this briefly above. I think humans have no idea what eternality is like and every attempt to make it about undying and immortality is unhelpful. I agree that I don't understand what it is like - but neither do you. you seem confused - how can knowing there is anything after death give you hope and yet the idea of no off switch scare you? I think that life - if that is the correct term in heaven is unlike anything we understand here. It is not a matter of an off switch - because that is a mortal term. Death is an unwelcome intrusion into our life. It does not make life beautiful. 
How do you know what i can and cannot imagine? I very well can imagine it, i've experienced it, and it is my worst nightmare to be eternal. You are saying a lot of things "you" are either afraid of or don't find torturous. And never said heaven is hell for you... obviously it's not. But yes, i think death makes this life beautiful. Without death we wouldn't know true anything. You may learn love sure, but love is taken to another level when you know you can loss it. Death is the most beautiful creation any higher intelligence could create. Here, let me paint a little analogy for you so you can see how i imagine it bc maybe you truly can't imagine it... I'll do the more extreme version but if you get it you can imagine the others too. Say you watch a movie and this movie is the best movie you've ever seen. Now, imagine i told you... you are not allowed to watch any other movie. Furthermore, i tell you this is the only entertainment you are allowed for the rest of your life. After how many times of watching that movie would it turn to hell? Now lets say it doesn't even have to be your only entertainment which is the most extreme version. Let's say you can have other entertainment but the only movie you are allowed to watch is this movie. You can't watch any other movie. How many times can you watch it... sure you might say you'll watch it once every year so you can still enjoy it, but times infinity into that... at what point would the movie become hell for you? That's what death is, turning that movie off and putting in a damn new show. It's beautiful and i'm sad you can't see it. 

3. so you want no restrictions? and you would become bored, is that it? Jesus indicated that there wont be marriage in heaven anyway - so infidelity is not an issue. You seem to have a warped idea of heaven - it is not just an extension of earth. 
So am i allowed to hook up with different chicks in heaven or not? If i can, then we can take this off the list. And, what i know of heaven is what Christian priests throughout the years have told me. But who knows, i might like your version. And you better believe i'm comparing it to things i love. Bc those are things i have fallen in love with bc of life. 

4. How do you know everyone is nice? And what is wrong with sunday worship? For me it is the highlight of my week. Yet, I don't think the bible gives us that kind of description anyway. there is going to be a lot of things to keep on doing.  Variety and creativity will be unbounded - and yet Heaven is not going to be an entertainment cruise ship - or a retirement home. IT is not Disney land. 
Again i don't care what you like or don't like. This is about "me." You are asking me to consider worshiping something for the rest of my life. I have to make sure... i'm not worshiping going to hell. You can go to heaven for all i care... I just know that isn't the only place. Sunday worship is boring and burdensome... i get nothing positive from it. I would rather listen to a radio preacher if anything. Also, i'm not talking about it being a theme park. Just normal everyday what it is... sounds torturous. Lastly, so you are saying not everyone is nice? I.e. can i troll people, can i manipulate people, can i hate people, can i just dislike some people, etc. in heaven? If you say yes, i will also reconsider taking that off my torture list. 

5. it seems that you misunderstand the bible. and I guess that is not surprising. I agree that if you want those things - then heaven really would be Hell for you.  Heaven is all about God - it is not about you. Yet, the alternatives are not going to give you those things either. Hell wont. So not only do you not get the things you desire - but you get tortured forever as well. And if there is no god - then you get death - an endless dismal darkness - with no escape - nothingness - no one remembering you. So, I find your comment about an after life - confusing as well as dismal. 
 What does heaven being about god have anything to do with the implications that will effect me? Bc it's me that will have to live it... unless i become god which is a different story and more on the lines of logical spiritual platform. And... you know the only other alternatives how? So again, what you are asking me to believe is hell all around. I hear you, and i hear what afterlife beliefs your telling me, none of them is "paradise" to me. So where does that leave me? Well, guess what... there are other spiritual beliefs that fix this paradox. So why in the world wouldn't i believe something that gives me paradise but live for something that will give me hell? All i'm saying is... that is a paradox for your heaven idea which is one of many reasons religion is so clearly man-made. Humans are fallible and especially humans thousands of years ago wouldn't have even considered paradise, as you describe it, being anything but paradise for them. 
 


#134
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
And if there is no god - then you get death - an endless dismal darkness - with no escape - nothingness - no one remembering you.
Just like it was before you were born, remember how awful that was? No? That's because you didn't exist, just like when you die you won't exist to be afraid of the dark. The fear you people are indoctrinated with is pathetic.

#135
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
Christian "A" says Jesus is God.
Christian "B" says Jesus is not God.
Christian "A" worships Jesus.
Christian "B" doesn't worship Jesus

Christian unity according to Trady. bwuahahahahahahah
#136
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@disgusted
And if there is no god - then you get death - an endless dismal darkness - with no escape - nothingness - no one remembering you.
Just like it was before you were born, remember how awful that was? No? That's because you didn't exist, just like when you die you won't exist to be afraid of the dark. The fear you people are indoctrinated with is pathetic.
And pray tell, how do you know what you have just described is true? Not science. Not experience. Just speculation based on what? A belief that it has to be. Talk about indoctrination!!!!! I don't remember anything because I did not exist. But now that I do exist - what happens in the future is something quite different. 

For you to speculate that we suddenly don't exist anymore is pseudo science. It is the substance of superstition. And not based in the real world. 
#137
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@disgusted
Christian "A" says Jesus is God.
Christian "B" says Jesus is not God.
Christian "A" worships Jesus.
Christian "B" doesn't worship Jesus

Christian unity according to Trady. bwuahahahahahahah
you are misinformed and do not understand. 

I said unity for Christians is having different idea but able to meet together in worship - so what you have posted is incorrect on many levels. 

Firstly, all Christians believe Jesus is God.  Yes some people claim they are Christians and also claim that Jesus is not God. They are not Christians. It is a claim that is refuted by the Christian Church as a whole. Even the most ecumenical council of churches - and a very liberal council at that - states that Christian faith in the Trinity is the hallmark of the Christian Church. If you don't believe Jesus is God, then you are a sect or a cult - a distortion of the true faith. 

Secondly, since all Christians believe Jesus is God - he is to be worshiped. 

This is a no brainer. 

Even someone as illogical as you ought to be able to understand this. 
#138
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
A christian who calls himself a christian is indistinguishable from a christian who calls himself a christian. One christian worships Jesus the other christian doesn't worship Jesus. You have different gods in the one religion, that doesn't sound very unified.
You don't get to determine who or what is a christian otherwise that non Jesus worshiping christian gets to determine whether you are a christian or not.
#139
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Outplayz
1. living without darkness? Do you mean the darkness of emotions like hate and jealousy and envy? You are correct - you would not recognise yourself without these things. I am not sure what this has got to do with heaven though or why it then becomes like Hell?
Yes i am talking about my hate, fear, jealousy, manipulation, anger, etc. It becomes hell if those emotions are taken away from me. I don't want them erased or gone. They make me who i am. And, i like using them against others sometimes. 
Then I guess you wont go to heaven or even understand or contemplate what it might be. Christians are people who find their identity in Christ, not themselves. The very act of regeneration - being born again - means to live in the life of Jesus, not yourself. 
2. undying and eternal.  I discussed this briefly above. I think humans have no idea what eternality is like and every attempt to make it about undying and immortality is unhelpful. I agree that I don't understand what it is like - but neither do you. you seem confused - how can knowing there is anything after death give you hope and yet the idea of no off switch scare you? I think that life - if that is the correct term in heaven is unlike anything we understand here. It is not a matter of an off switch - because that is a mortal term. Death is an unwelcome intrusion into our life. It does not make life beautiful. 
How do you know what i can and cannot imagine? I very well can imagine it, i've experienced it, and it is my worst nightmare to be eternal. You are saying a lot of things "you" are either afraid of or don't find torturous. And never said heaven is hell for you... obviously it's not. But yes, i think death makes this life beautiful. Without death we wouldn't know true anything. You may learn love sure, but love is taken to another level when you know you can loss it. Death is the most beautiful creation any higher intelligence could create. Here, let me paint a little analogy for you so you can see how i imagine it bc maybe you truly can't imagine it... I'll do the more extreme version but if you get it you can imagine the others too. Say you watch a movie and this movie is the best movie you've ever seen. Now, imagine i told you... you are not allowed to watch any other movie. Furthermore, i tell you this is the only entertainment you are allowed for the rest of your life. After how many times of watching that movie would it turn to hell? Now lets say it doesn't even have to be your only entertainment which is the most extreme version. Let's say you can have other entertainment but the only movie you are allowed to watch is this movie. You can't watch any other movie. How many times can you watch it... sure you might say you'll watch it once every year so you can still enjoy it, but times infinity into that... at what point would the movie become hell for you? That's what death is, turning that movie off and putting in a damn new show. It's beautiful and i'm sad you can't see it. 
Because you are human. Humans cannot imagine things from a divine perspective because they are not divine. Duh!  You have never experienced immortality or eternality. I think death is an unwanted intrusion into life. Death makes life dead. It is not beautiful. Death brings grief - and yes it certainly drives home what we can miss out on, but it does not make it better. I cant love better just because I am dead- or someone else is dead. What a bizarre thing to think. Your notion of love is obviously not the same as I understand. Your analogy is unhelpful because it is so flawed. Why would I care if another movie existed if I had only ever seen one movie and only one existed. I would need to know that another existed for me to be mildly interested. I am quite happy to have a kiss from my wife every night of my life for my entire life - and more - without having to experience the kiss of another woman. It is my choice to do this. I am quite content worshiping ONE GOD as well. 
3. so you want no restrictions? and you would become bored, is that it? Jesus indicated that there wont be marriage in heaven anyway - so infidelity is not an issue. You seem to have a warped idea of heaven - it is not just an extension of earth. 
So am i allowed to hook up with different chicks in heaven or not? If i can, then we can take this off the list. And, what i know of heaven is what Christian priests throughout the years have told me. But who knows, i might like your version. And you better believe i'm comparing it to things i love. Bc those are things i have fallen in love with bc of life. 
LOL! Whatever. 



#140
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Outplayz
4. How do you know everyone is nice? And what is wrong with sunday worship? For me it is the highlight of my week. Yet, I don't think the bible gives us that kind of description anyway. there is going to be a lot of things to keep on doing.  Variety and creativity will be unbounded - and yet Heaven is not going to be an entertainment cruise ship - or a retirement home. IT is not Disney land. 
Again i don't care what you like or don't like. This is about "me." You are asking me to consider worshiping something for the rest of my life. I have to make sure... i'm not worshiping going to hell. You can go to heaven for all i care... I just know that isn't the only place. Sunday worship is boring and burdensome... i get nothing positive from it. I would rather listen to a radio preacher if anything. Also, i'm not talking about it being a theme park. Just normal everyday what it is... sounds torturous. Lastly, so you are saying not everyone is nice? I.e. can i troll people, can i manipulate people, can i hate people, can i just dislike some people, etc. in heaven? If you say yes, i will also reconsider taking that off my torture list. 
You are once again mistaken. I am not asking you to consider anything. Heaven is not about you. Life is not about you. It never was and never will be.  It is and always will be about God. History is HIS STORY. It is not our story. Heaven sounds like it would be hell for you - whatever it was about - because we all know it is not about us. 
5. it seems that you misunderstand the bible. and I guess that is not surprising. I agree that if you want those things - then heaven really would be Hell for you.  Heaven is all about God - it is not about you. Yet, the alternatives are not going to give you those things either. Hell wont. So not only do you not get the things you desire - but you get tortured forever as well. And if there is no god - then you get death - an endless dismal darkness - with no escape - nothingness - no one remembering you. So, I find your comment about an after life - confusing as well as dismal. 
 What does heaven being about god have anything to do with the implications that will effect me? Bc it's me that will have to live it... unless i become god which is a different story and more on the lines of logical spiritual platform. And... you know the only other alternatives how? So again, what you are asking me to believe is hell all around. I hear you, and i hear what afterlife beliefs your telling me, none of them is "paradise" to me. So where does that leave me? Well, guess what... there are other spiritual beliefs that fix this paradox. So why in the world wouldn't i believe something that gives me paradise but live for something that will give me hell? All i'm saying is... that is a paradox for your heaven idea which is one of many reasons religion is so clearly man-made. Humans are fallible and especially humans thousands of years ago wouldn't have even considered paradise, as you describe it, being anything but paradise for them. 
I am sorry - you just don't get it. And it sounds like you don't want to get it. So go and eat and drink and be merry - for life is erstwhile meaningless. 

#141
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
because we all know it is not about us. 

Humans cannot imagine things from a divine perspective because they are not divine
Ah come again. You just can't help contradicting yourself.
#142
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
It's based on 3.5 billion years of experience. We evolved on this planet just like your stories of an afterlife did to pacify your fear of death, you know the end of the life that evolved here. Please inform  me by whom I was indoctrinated, that will be fun.
#143
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@disgusted
And pray tell - what is the contradiction? 


#144
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@disgusted
Sorry dearest,

there is not one shred of evidence that once we die - that is it. All death proves is that the human body decays. It does not show us or help us understand what happens to the consciousness. 

That is the mystery. 

and that has not been explained - although many theories and ideas have evolved for want of a better word. Jesus did rise from the dead- but people such as yourself ignore that evidence - which demonstrates to me that you are not interested in truth - but more want to go with your indoctrination. Who after all told you that dead people don't rise?

Experience?  How many ACTUAL dead people have you really seen? If the number is more than zero you would certainly be unique in the West. And unless you are a doctor, a police officer, or work in a morgue or a nursing home, the strict number of dead people you have seen will be less than five. Hence, your conclusion on the matter is clearly guesswork at best - or you believe your infallible textbooks.
#145
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
there is not one shred of evidence that once we die - that is it. All death proves is that the human body decays. It does not show us or help us understand what happens to the consciousness. 
There is 3.5 billion years of evidence that death is the end, ALL of the evidence is that death is the end. Everything dies and consciousness is a function of a living brain, at death all bodily functions cease you have absolutely no evidence to contradict that. Consciousness is a bodily function.
That is the mystery. 
You want it to be a mystery because you lack the courage to confront your death, it's OK there's no need to be frightened you won't even know that you're dead.
and that has not been explained - although many theories and ideas have evolved for want of a better word. Jesus did rise from the dead- but people such as yourself ignore that evidence - which demonstrates to me that you are not interested in truth - but more want to go with your indoctrination. Who after all told you that dead people don't rise?
There is no evidence concerning this mythical Jesus character and people don't come back from the dead, that is the truth, fairy tales are not truth as is proven by 200,000yrs of human existence. That's reality and that knowledge is availability to everyone, even you.
Experience?  How many ACTUAL dead people have you really seen? If the number is more than zero you would certainly be unique in the West. And unless you are a doctor, a police officer, or work in a morgue or a nursing home, the strict number of dead people you have seen will be less than five. Hence, your conclusion on the matter is clearly guesswork at best - or you believe your infallible textbooks.
Wow does that rouge fish smell a bit to you, a paragraph of meaningless drivel yes I've seen dead bodies. Anybody with the capacity to think doesn't need a textbook to know that every creature to have ever existed on this planet has died sans those currently alive. Not really guesswork it's knowledge available to anyone. You haven't told me yet who I have been indoctrinated by, man up. Godism requires indoctrination, independent thinking never needs it as an atheist I'm an independent thinker where as you lack the capacity to be so.
#146
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
Why does St Christopher have the head of a dog?
Topic's author
#147
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Swagnarok
Is there anything the Orthodox church can do to make itself less...ethnically exclusive? Is the larger church taking concrete action now to give itself a broader appeal? If not, why not?

I don't see how the Orthodox is ethnically exclusive. In my parish there are people from Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Ethiopia, China, Mexico, Romania, Russia, Greece and of course.. The United States. 

Our services are in English.


There is nothing ethnically exclusive about The Orthodox Church.


The Church is less interested in being broadly appealing than it is maintaining The Holy Tradition faithfully. 

The churches in the west that care about being broadly appealing tend to be corrupted by the prevailing culture.

Topic's author
#148
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Tradesecret
In Australia the Methodists formed a new church with the Presbyterians. It took three churches and made one new one. the older churches to a large extent becoming redundant. Calvinism is simply Augustinian in essence anyway. Even the orthodox church accepts his teaching as one of the early doctors in the church.  The Methodists derive from the Episcopalian church - and never sought to become its own denomination. To be perfectly honest - the Episcopalian Church is a broad church and both Calvinism and Wesley's disciples are able to fit quite comfortably within its ranks.

I'm sure you will find a protestant church that matches some ideal of what you would like Protestantism to be, but the fact of the matter is there is no single protestant church. 

So you say the older churches are to a large extent becoming redundant. What that means to me is that protestants don't honor their parents and lack the charity to continue with a church, preferring to set up their own church.

And that is what defines protestantism. Accepting no authority, because even claiming to accept the bible as authority alone is a pretense for accepting one's interpretation of what the bible says.


We Orthodox do respect Augustine as one of ours. However, he knew Latin, and the bible that he used led him to believe that all of mankind shares the guilt of Adam's sin. That is not actually what Orthodoxy teaches. We inherited the mess of Adam's sin, not the guilt. Just as we are where we are because of what our ancestors did. It is very different. 

Oddly enough, this one little misunderstanding has come to define Augustinianism in the west. 

I would like to note that I have always really enjoyed Augustine, but he isn't the only Church father. As far as the protestant west is concerned, he might as well be the only one! A history of the church book you will find in a protestant seminary will have a span of 1,500 years that can fit on 3 pages. Then to Zwingli, Luther, Calvin, etc. The protestant church is a church with amnesia, because despite claims to the contrary, they threw out a great deal more than just the papacy when they broke from the Latin Church!

As for the Lutheran Church, yes protestant. Yet, like the Episcopalian church, the RCC, and the OC maintain the fictional apostolic succession.

Yet The Roman Catholic Church is schismatic, and the Episcopalian church is a schismatic off of a schismatic. So really, they aren't The Church.


I also see the great variety of denominations as one of the most amazing things that provides real unity to the Church. Rather than seeing it something negative which is what many people - especially the atheists - do - I think it is one of our chief strengths. When Christians can disagree with fundamental aspects of their religion yet still unite on the primary truths of the Gospel, this signals tolerance of the greatest virtue - something which the rest of the world tends to fall behind in all over the place. The only time we see unity of any kind in the world apart from what the church brings - is either in times of great tragedy or the Olympics. Sports tends to act as an equaliser yet - it only goes so far. It is the unity that the world sees of the church when it comes together that is staggering. If the church had only one opinion - it could not demonstrate unity - only sameness. This would place it in the realm of the cults or the sects. This is probably why the OC is often put into a the realm of brainwashing - and superstitious because of its sameness. Sameness is not unity. It is the blind leading the blind. Unity by virtue of its definition requires variety - and non-sameness or otherwise its loses its meaning. When people of different views can disagree and unite it reveals real love.

The next logical step is calling loving Hindus, Muslims, and even secularists Christians.


If you love people, that is great. That is what we are supposed to do. The good Samaritan was not a Jew, but his love was to be emulated. However, gnostics, arians, iconoclasts, monophysites, etc... They are not Christians. They are Christian in name only. What heretic admits to being so? They all think they are Christians. Well, they can't be because they not only believe and teach things contrary to the faith, but they take so much pride in it as to separate themselves from the rest of the church and even wage war against it.


Topic's author
#149
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Tradesecret
There is a clear implication that the creed could be altered if it were to improve its meaning - obviously no one at that time believed that the creed was equal to Scripture because no one was infallible like God. 

Yet even scripture says

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:"

It proceeds from the father, not the son. You could say that the spirit proceeds from the father through the son, and maybe not be incorrect, but The Holy Spirit proceeds from the father, not the father and the son.

So scripture is on the side of those who did not corrupt the creed.

And by the way, there is no such implication at the council that the creed can arbitrarily be changed if something better comes along. The churches are Catholic, meaning that they all believe and teach the same thing.




The OC had and still has issues with the roles of icons in its place. It also has strong links to Constantine. The RCC now has significant issues in respect of icons as well.  


What exactly is the issue with the roles of Icons? Icons have been in the church since the very beginning. Jesus himself is described in scripture as The Most Perfect Icon of God.


Please also explain how sin is not necessarily a breach of God's covenant but rather a diminishing of God's image? 

I wouldn't go so far to say that sin isn't a breach of God's covenant, but it certainly is a diminishing of God's image. How does being dead in sin reflect the life of Christ? 


So we should all be Calvinists then? 

I have yet to meet an Orthodox Priest that embraced calvinism. Quite the contrary, It seems to be viewed as one of the most pernicious and abominable deviations of the faith. The priests I know are very anti-calvinist. It genuinely offends them.




Topic's author
#150
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
The laying on of hands occurred several times in Scripture. I am not saying that laying on of hands is a myth. I am saying that the apostolic succession that both the RCC and the OC hold to is a superstition. The Holy Spirit is not communicated to us from God by the laying on off hands. The Spirit goes where it wills. There is no evidence that the apostles laid hands on James, a so called bishop of Jerusalem. The words in the Greek for Bishop and elder are interchangeable in every case. I am not against tradition per se. Yet when Scriptures disagrees with tradition - scripture prevails. Also there is no command to lay hands on persons - to set them aside as elders or bishops etc. These people are known by the character and their godliness and deeds. Not because they have had hands laid on them.  

No one is saying that the holy spirit is communicated to us by the laying on of hands here.
There is evidence that James was the first bishop of Jerusalem, but you wouldn't know that because you ignore anything that wasn't written in the collection of writings that we, The Orthodox Church put together.

The church certainly does appoint leaders, and scripture even tells us to listen to these leaders. 

Once again, do you think that the entire Church just sat around and waited until The New Testament was officially agreed on? This is certainly not the case. You don't know what Church Tradition is. If you did, you would know that we have writings dating back to the very people who were appointed by the Apostles as bishops. I belong to the church of Antioch. We have the writings of Saint Ignatius, who was appointed by Peter when he left Antioch. The letters that Ignatius wrote while on his way to being executed for being a Christian survive to this day. We have the writings of Clement of Rome, a contemporary of the Apostles.

And these writings very easily refute the claims of protestants and strengthen the claims of the very church founded by Jesus and The Apostles.

Misleading. The OC just compromises to the cultures it exists in. It from the beginning - compromised to focus on icons of the surrounding pagan nations - not like God commanded the Jews to be rid off. Don't forget the OC continues to justify its reasons for breaking the second commandment. Probably like the RCC they simply try and delete it. 

There is nothing about the use of icons that violate the second commandment. There were Cheribum on the Ark of the Covenant. The Temple of Solomon was filled with images and sculptures. The Bible itself is an icon. Church Tradition says that Saint Luke, the very same Luke who wrote the majority of the New Testament, painted the first Icon of Jesus and Mary. 

There were several periods where The Roman Emperor adopted Iconoclasm and tried to eradicate them from the churches. It didn't work, and the 7th ecumenical council denounced Iconoclasm as a heresy once and for all.

And yes, Iconoclasm is a heresy. In fact, if you throw out Icons, you throw out everything. 



The OC lacks a full and complete understanding of the Trinity. This is one of the reasons the church ex-communicated it. Go and read the council's minutes. Entertaining. And full of evidence.  The OC is incomplete in relation to salvation. It does not have a proper understanding of sin - hence it can never grasp why simply trying to restore the image is not enough. We don't want to become Adam in his perfect state again - we want to become like Jesus in his perfect state. The two are quite different. the practice of iconology simply confirms this fact. Reducing Jesus out of fear of not understanding his deity reveals an incompleteness. And looking at only one side of history by itself is incomplete. These are not just opinions dear mopac - it goes much deeper than this. 

Orthodoxy IS The Church, and I find it baffling that you, someone who does not even believe in Roman Catholicism, the very church that your churches rebelled from, would dare defend these heretics as being the true church when not only does history make this very clear, but your own churches believe that they were in rebellion as well.

You undermine your own argument because you don't even believe it.

And to be frank, you don't know what The Orthodox Church teaches. But that is what this topic is for. Asking questions.


I am interested though, since you seem to think that Orthodoxy lacks a full and complete understanding of The Trinity... How can you substantiate this claim? It is simply just a claim. 


I find it utterly baffling that you are arguing for a non-existent complete Protestant Church, and that you would dare defend The Papal heretics as claiming greater legitimacy to being The True Church than Orthodoxy when you don't even really believe this yourself.