One of Mohammed’s wives was left unprotected after he murdered her husband in battle, so... Multiple marriages acrren’t ideal in any situation. Nor were Biblical prophets right in their taking of multiple wives.
There have been many prophecies regarding the Beast, it’s possible Jews of the time thought it was emperor Antiochus IV, as the later Christians thought it was Nero. However the real Beast and anti Christ hasn’t appeared yet.Just because the Dispensationalists believe that's the anti-christ doesn't mean they are right. In any case, your original assertion that there was only one anti-christ is shown to be false in the only verses that explicitly mention it. I believe the figure mentioned in the Book of Daniel was the Seleucid Emperor Antiochus IV.
Paul condemns marriage in general if one wants to live a pure life. The Bible rejects things of this world as fervently as possible, Polygamy is on that list. Prophets were also sinful human being like us. Many times when Biblical prophets either chose to marry more then one wife or as in the case of Abraham have a relationship with his concubine Hagar we find their actions condemned in later passages.If he died in battle, Muhammad didn't murder her. As for the biblical prophets taking multiple wives, the Bible never condemns this. For kings to have multiple wives was more problematic, because multiple wives were nearly always foreign being part of diplomatic relations.
St Ambrose shut down pagan temples in fear that the pagans would start to cause riots and start political trouble, it wasn’t out of biblical criminal law. As Christianity has no criminal law.
Church Fathers obliged women to cover and use head covers, I’m not sure what you mean by veil, if you em an To veil the body then your right, but the Church Fathers never advocated the covering of the face.
St Augustine isn’t one of the Church Fathers in the Orthodox Church
Yes, I realize this. The Church's insistence on monogamy had nothing to do with fairness to women. In fact, their tendency to see women as the dangerous temptress lowered their status. But nowhere in the Bible is Abraham or any other prophet condemned for taking another wife or concubine. The rejection of "things of the world" is specifically Christian but the concept has no place in the Tanakh which is decidedly "this worldly."Paul condemns marriage in general if one wants to live a pure life.
There have been many prophecies regarding the Beast, it’s possible Jews of the time thought it was emperor Antiochus IV, as the later Christians thought it was Nero.
However the real Beast and anti Christ hasn’t appeared yet.
The Tanakh if you notice, does attempt to condemn Abraham’s marriage to Hagar without openly stating it. It’s not that women are temptresses its that men are also prone to sin and lust and marriages often get complicated and lead people away from God.Yes, I realize this. The Church's insistence on monogamy had nothing to do with fairness to women. In fact, their tendency to see women as the dangerous temptress lowered their status. But nowhere in the Bible is Abraham or any other prophet condemned for taking another wife or concubine. The rejection of "things of the world" is specifically Christian but the concept has no place in the Tanakh which is decidedly "this worldly."
Julian came into the picture many years later. St Augustine is rather controversial when it comes to us if you read Orthodox wiki you’d find there are many views on him in the Orthodox Church also there’s no endorsement of his theology in our Church as with the Catholic or Protestant Churches. Chrysostom, in Homily 26 on the Veiling of Women advocated for a veil and even gave instructions on how it should wrap around the head and neck, it never mentions the covering of the face as you may read it yourself. The dress code described of Christian women would be how you typically see pictures of Mary covered.St. Ambrose doesn't do this himself he persuades Emperor Theodosius to do so. And the Emperor most definitely made laws to this effect. It had nothing to do with riots. It had to do with Julius becoming Emperor and encouraging the old religion.
They most definitely did. St. John Chrysostom argues that a woman ought to “be carefully wrapped up on every side” at all times. "All sides" includes the face. But thank you for conceding that Church Fathers pronounced on other things than doctrine.
Yes he is. https://orthodoxwiki.org/Augustine_of_Hippo
You’d have to consider she grew up in a largely pagan and non Christian environment.Incidentally, Orthodox wiki also has this interesting article on Augustine's mother St. Monica which states the following about her: "She attended church regularly and admonished women who were beaten to restrain their tongues around their husbands rather than proudly standing up to them."
https://orthodoxwiki.org/Monica_of_Hippo
Yes, I realize this. The Church's insistence on monogamy had nothing to do with fairness to women. In fact, their tendency to see women as the dangerous temptress lowered their status. But nowhere in the Bible is Abraham or any other prophet condemned for taking another wife or concubine. The rejection of "things of the world" is specifically Christian but the concept has no place in the Tanakh which is decidedly "this worldly."
Baha’i have their own belief in the Dajjal as Muslims do if I’m correct? If I’m correct many though 666 or 616 to reffer to Nero.There is a debate as to which Roman Emperor the number 666 or 616 in Revelation (depending on which manuscript) referred to, but it was a Roman Emperor.
They have come and gone more than once.
The Tanakh if you notice, does attempt to condemn Abraham’s marriage to Hagar without openly stating it.
It’s not that women are temptresses its that men are also prone to sin and lust and marriages often get complicated and lead people away from God.
You’d have to consider she grew up in a largely pagan and non Christian environment.
My mistake, I meant to say relationship. Yes your right on that, since Sarah couldn’t compose a child she gave Abraham her handmaiden to conceive a child. Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria are not special people to the Eastern Orthodox Church, as for St Augustine we’d have to read what he said in context otherwise we can’t assume anything.They were never married. It was a custom among Semitic peoples at the time that when a elite-class woman was married she brought in as part of her dowry a handmaiden. If she failed to produce an heir or sufficient heirs her handmaiden would serve as her surrogate. When the surrogate gave birth she would do so in the lap of the legitimate wife and the child would then become the legitimate child of both the husband and the wife. If you read the Bible carefully you'll see Jacob had children from four women, his two wives and their two handmaidens.
This is the basis of the TV series Handmaid's Tale.
- Woman is a temple built over a sewer. –Tertullian, “the father of Latin Christianity” (c160-225)
- You are the devil’s gateway; you are she who first violated the forbidden tree and broke the law of God. It was you who coaxed your way around him whom the devil had not the force to attack. With what ease you shattered that image of God: Man! Because of the death you merited, even the Son of God had to die… Woman, you are the gate to hell. –Tertullian, “the father of Latin Christianity” (c160-225): On the Apparel of Women, chapter 1
- [Women’s] very consciousness of their own nature must evoke feelings of shame.–Saint Clement of Alexandria, Christian theologian (c150-215): Pedagogues II, 33, 2
- What is the difference whether it is in a wife or a mother, it is still Eve the temptress that we must beware of in any woman… I fail to see what use woman can be to man, if one excludes the function of bearing children. –Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo Regius (354 – 430): De genesi ad litteram, 9, 5-9
Her husband was no Christian, Berbers were also largely pagan at the time. Here’s some background on her:What I quoted was considered an example of her saintliness. And she was raised a Christian by her Berber parents.
Julian came into the picture many years later.
There is no unqualified endorsement of any of the church fathers. What you stated is that he is not considered a Church Father, which is false.St Augustine is rather controversial when it comes to us if you read Orthodox wiki you’d find there are many views on him in the Orthodox Church also there’s no endorsement of his theology
Her husband was no Christian, Berbers were also largely pagan at the time. Here’s some background on her:
https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=1
Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria are not special people to the Eastern Orthodox Church, as for St Augustine we’d have to read what he said in context otherwise we can’t assume anything.
Clement and Tertullian as I’ve said hapold no meaning in the Orthodox Church. Many problems were found in the teachings of Saint Augustine although we respect his defense of Christianity against heresy and his devotion to God, much of his theology is controversial and messed up according to what most Orthodox here would tell you.Julian the Apostate reigned from 361 to 363. St. Ambrose became bishop in 371 A.D.
There is no unqualified endorsement of any of the church fathers. What you stated is that he is not considered a Church Father, which is false.
Reading from Orthodoxwiki:
"The Fifth Ecumenical Council, held in Constantinople in A.D. 553, listed Augustine among other Fathers of the Church, though there is no unqualified endorsement of his theology mentioned (just as there is none for most saints of the Church):
We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith.[1]"
But since his works were translated into Greek, they weren't widely known in the Orthodox just as the Catholics know little about the Greek Church Fathers.
As for the question of whether the veils covered their heads or their faces as well, there is some disagreement. Tertullian felt it applied only to the head. But Clement of Alexandria insisted: "Let the woman observe this, further. Let her be entirely covered, unless she happens to be at home. For that style of dress is grave, and protects from being gazed at. And she will never fall, who puts before her eyes modesty, and her shawl; nor will she invite another to fall into sin by uncovering her face. For this is the wish of the Word, since it is becoming for her to pray veiled." [Clement, The Instructor 3.12]
The answer: In reality, Tertullian derived the Trinity from the point that God is revealed to have made a covenant with Israel, yet from God’s side, there were three signatories to this covenant. In Roman law, a party to a legal agreement is called a persona. Many Christian Saints and scholars before Tertullian and even the Nicaea ascribed to a Trinitarian doctrine.Interesting since it is Tertullian who first comes up with the idea of the Trinity. As for St. Augustine, I've read the entire City of God. That's probably enough context.
