Please : Do they know of which astrological sign was Jesus ?

ViaCrucis · Dec 31, 2025

peter2 said:
Thank you.
"Wise men", in some translations happen to be called : "magi", which in french means : "priest and astrologer of antic Assyrie".
i was just following this hypothetic clue Jesus might have been influenced by an astrology-related speech they might have told Joseph and Mary.
i say to myself : "why not, if we consider Gabriel or Symeon's speeches have influenced Jesus through what his parents have heard ?".

In Greek a magos (plural magoi) referred to a priestly class from Persia (maybe Zoroastrians?) connected to performing rituals, interpreting dreams, reading omens, etc. The word came to have a broader meaning, for example Simon Magus was a cult leader who claimed to perform great deeds, and was called "the great power". There's really no reason to associate him with Persia, but he was a Samaritan who had a cult following and the epithet "Magus" is likely tied to his claim of being able to work "wonders". Not that he actually could, but that he claimed to, and had those that believed he could. Which is how this word would eventually give us "magic" and "magician" etc. It's a bit like how "wizard" originally just meant "wise person" (compare drunkard, a drunk person; sluggard, a lazy person, etc) but evolved to mean something else.

The magi from the East are very likely from somewhere in Persia, the fact that they were following a star indicates they were stargazers. They probably did practice some kind of astrology.

The Bible at no point condones the act of using the stars to predict the future, astrology is always condemned as all forms of divination are always condemned as contrived human superstition.

And yet throughout the Bible God acts in profoundly unexpected ways. When Barlaam the false prophet went out to offer a false prophecy against God's people, God caused his donkey to speak. When Saul sought out the necromancer to speak to the departed soul of the Prophet Samuel, Samuel actually shows up and rebukes Saul. The person who kept Joshua and Caleb safe was a prostitute.

The existence of the magi is presented as the recognition of a foreign nation coming to worship the King--even when God's own people weren't recognizing the King.

The Christmas Story, as told in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, present to us profoundly counter-intuitive events surrounding the birth of not just a king, but THE King.

When Jesus is born angels herald and announce His birth. To whom do they announce it? To the courts of Herod and Caesar, to the emperors and kings and princes and powerful? No, it is to a group of poor shepherds looking after their sheep out in a field. Where is the King born? In a palace surrounded by servants and gold? No, in a place where animals were kept, and He had as His first bed a manger--the feeding trough of an animal. The heavens themselves, seemingly, proclaimed the birth of the King, and yet it is not Herod, it is not the sages and learned men of Judea, it is not recognized by God's own people--but by foreigners.

We also can't ignore the prophetic significance of this.

"For My name will be great among the nations, from where the sun rises to where it sets. In every place, incense and pure offerings will be presented in My name, because My name will be great among the nations,” says the LORD of Hosts." - Malachi 1:11

"In the last days the mountain of the house of the LORD will be established as the chief of the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream to it.

And many peoples will come and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us His ways so that we may walk in His paths.” For the law will go forth from Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem." - Isaiah 2:2-3

"All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the LORD. All the families of the nations will bow down before Him.

For dominion belongs to the LORD and He rules over the nations." - Psalm 22:27-28

"Nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawn." - Isaiah 60:3

These foreigners bringing gifts of gold and incense to the feet of Jesus, worshiping Him. It hearkens to the promise of God bringing the nations to Himself, it anticipates the going forth of the word of God, the preaching of the Gospel, to every nation and tribe. "Go forth and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit" "You will be My witnesses beginning in Jerusalem, through all of Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." "Preach the Gospel to every living creature"

It's not about God putting some stamp of approval on astrology. But it is about the unexpected ways in which God is fulfilling His promises.

peter2 · Dec 31, 2025

ViaCrucis said:
It's not about God putting some stamp of approval on astrology. But it is about the unexpected ways in which God is fulfilling His promises.

ViaCrucis said:
"Preach the Gospel to every living creature"

I deeply thank you for your passionate message.
May be i should make myself more accurate. Thank you also for it helps me to do so
Indeed, when i write

peter2 said:
Indeed,
through his own baptism by John, he might also have washed and get rid of men' superstitious or pagan beliefs in the Jordan, according to a hypothesis of mine, in order to become the lamb of God, as you say.

i don't want to mean Jesus did put some stamps of approval on astrology, but that he likely had to struggle against.
It was a bit like making his foes a footstool

JacquelineDeane55 · Dec 31, 2025

Why does OP believe in Astrology? As the other guy said, its complete and utter nonsense. Also it is forbidden in the Bible to practice it.

peter2 · Dec 31, 2025

JacquelineDeane55 said:
Why does OP believe in Astrology? As the other guy said, its complete and utter nonsense. Also it is forbidden in the Bible to practice it.

Hello Jacqueline
As for me, i never built hypothesis in relation with astrology. I simply observe some people do, and concluded the belief in astrology exists, even if i don't believe in astrology myself.
Indeed, it's just that i can't ignore these persons believe in astrology (or other pagan beliefs), nor did Jesus ignore them, i suppose.
i assume he subsequently had to struggle against the belief of astrology's disciples, and may be against other pagan beliefs

peter2 · Jan 1, 2026

ViaCrucis said:
In Greek a magos (plural magoi) referred to a priestly class from Persia (maybe Zoroastrians?) connected to performing rituals, interpreting dreams, reading omens, etc. The word came to have a broader meaning, for example Simon Magus was a cult leader who claimed to perform great deeds, and was called "the great power". There's really no reason to associate him with Persia, but he was a Samaritan who had a cult following and the epithet "Magus" is likely tied to his claim of being able to work "wonders". Not that he actually could, but that he claimed to, and had those that believed he could. Which is how this word would eventually give us "magic" and "magician" etc. It's a bit like how "wizard" originally just meant "wise person" (compare drunkard, a drunk person; sluggard, a lazy person, etc) but evolved to mean something else.

Hello Via Crucis, sorry for this late answer New year's day is the cause.

Thank you for your analysis of words, stemming from their ethymologies. However it much makes sense, i'd rather classify them as hypothesis, since the words evoluting sometimes ends up meaning something else, as you also already told,

(for instance, in french the word "knowledge" you may find in Genesis about the tree of knowledge of good and evil is : "connaissance", which i've long been wondering whether it mightn't have originally meant : "naissance avec" ou "naissance ensemble" (both from "co-naissance"), that is : "birth-with" or "birth-together"),

and i try and remain prudent as for concluding.
As for the hypothesis wizard stems from wise person or wise man, etc., etc..,with drunkard, sluggard, etc.., the problem occurs that
wizardry isn't promoted by christianism,
whereas
wisdom, yes.
So it makes me perplex
i would just inform you that in french, "wise men" are translated with "mage" "that comes from "magicien" (magus), and is defined as priest, astrologer, or person that practices magic, occultism

The Liturgist · Friday at 8:14 PM

peter2 said:
Hello Delvianna. Than you for being informative.
Yet, the controversial Santa Claus is not from God either, and many express an opinion on his legend.
(To be honest, no response won't undermine my sleep)

St. Nicholas of Myra and St. Basil the Great, the two fourth century bishops on whom Santa Claus is based, absolutely are of God. St. Nicholas was one of the 318 Holy Fathers at the Council of Nicaea who upheld the Nicene Creed (which as a Catholic I would assume you are acquainted with) and the anathematization of Arius by St. Alexander the bishop of Alexandria. Additionally, before his episcopate, in the late third century, he used his own inheritance to provide the dowries for three girls whose father, who was a Christian, had lost his fortune, and felt that he had no choice but for his girls to enter into prostitution - St. Nicholas prevented that.

St Basil the Great was one of the Cappadocian fathers, the older brother of St. Gregory of Nyssa and the best friend of St. Gregory the Theologian (also known as St. Gregory of Nazianzus), a staunch defender of the Nicene Creed and opponent of Arianism, who used the treasury of his diocese (he was also a bishop, of Caesarea in Cappadocia), to build the first recognizable hospital open to anyone regardless of their ability to pay, along with a hostel for travelers and a hospice.

Santa Claus is a synthesis of hagiopgraphy surrounding these two bishops, who are venerated to a great extent. Indeed among the Eastern Orthodox, St. Basil is venerated on January the 1st, and is the author of one of the two main Divine Liturgies we use (which is also in a variant form, known to Liturgiologists as EgBAS, the primary liturgy used by the Coptic Orthodox Church, an Oriental Orthodox jurisdiction, and this modified form is the basis for Eucharistic Prayer no. 4 in the Novus Ordo Missae and Eucharistic Prayer D in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer; that prayer basically being a stripped down, minimalist version of the Egyptian form of the liturgy of St. Basil. We additionally venerate him later in January on the Feast of the Three Holy Hierarchs, together with St. Gregory the Theologian and St. John Chrysostom.

St. Nicholas is venerated on December 6th (which is December 19th for those on the traditional Julian Calendar) and is also venerated every Thursday together with the Holy Apostles in the Eastern Orthodox Church (we venerate St. John the Baptist and the Holy Martyrs every Tuesday; Monday we venerate the Archangels, Angels and Bodiless Powers, Wednesday and Friday are dedicated to remembrance of the Cross, Saturday to our departed loved ones, our glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary, and all the Saints, and Sunday, the Resurrection.

+

In contrast, astrology is false and dangerous; the actual translation for Magi is a Zoroastrian priest, although the term was also used for priests from some Mesopotamian and Assyrian religions that had vague similarities, for example, Mandaeism, in which astrology does play a role, but only insofar as the planets are viewed as evil oppressors. And no one can convert to Mandaeism; it is a closed ethno-religious minority, severely persecuted.

Also knowing the astrological sign of our Lord would be rather difficult; we know he rose from the dead on March 25th, 33 AD, and it is believed that he was conceived on the same date (many believed he was conceived in 1 AD but it seems more likely he was conceived in 6 BC, since Augustus was still alive, which creates a constraint. This implies a december birth. However, due to calendar drift, the signs of the Zodiac no longer line up with what they were historically, and what is more, there are different systems of astrology, so if the Magi were practitioners of some astrological sect of Zoroastrianism, they might have followed an entirely different system. Furthermore, the Magi, even if they engaged in astrology as part of their religion, were not interested in the sign of our Lord but rather the star that appeared in the sky that led them to Him.

Furthermore the idea that our Lord was influenced by what they said to him and by the Nunc Dimitis sung by St. Symeon is not mainstream; it implies our Lord was somehow inspired to become a Messiah by what people said about him at birth, rather than by the fact that He is the incarnate Son and Word of God, of one essence with the Father, begotten of the Father before all ages, who became man through the Blessed Virgin Mary being miraculously impregnated by the Holy Spirit while retaining her full and perpetual virginity.

The Liturgist · Friday at 8:23 PM

ViaCrucis said:
In Greek a magos (plural magoi) referred to a priestly class from Persia (maybe Zoroastrians?) connected to performing rituals, interpreting dreams, reading omens, etc. The word came to have a broader meaning, for example Simon Magus was a cult leader who claimed to perform great deeds, and was called "the great power". There's really no reason to associate him with Persia, but he was a Samaritan who had a cult following and the epithet "Magus" is likely tied to his claim of being able to work "wonders". Not that he actually could, but that he claimed to, and had those that believed he could. Which is how this word would eventually give us "magic" and "magician" etc. It's a bit like how "wizard" originally just meant "wise person" (compare drunkard, a drunk person; sluggard, a lazy person, etc) but evolved to mean something else.

The magi from the East are very likely from somewhere in Persia, the fact that they were following a star indicates they were stargazers. They probably did practice some kind of astrology.

The Bible at no point condones the act of using the stars to predict the future, astrology is always condemned as all forms of divination are always condemned as contrived human superstition.

And yet throughout the Bible God acts in profoundly unexpected ways. When Barlaam the false prophet went out to offer a false prophecy against God's people, God caused his donkey to speak. When Saul sought out the necromancer to speak to the departed soul of the Prophet Samuel, Samuel actually shows up and rebukes Saul. The person who kept Joshua and Caleb safe was a prostitute.

The existence of the magi is presented as the recognition of a foreign nation coming to worship the King--even when God's own people weren't recognizing the King.

The Christmas Story, as told in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, present to us profoundly counter-intuitive events surrounding the birth of not just a king, but THE King.

When Jesus is born angels herald and announce His birth. To whom do they announce it? To the courts of Herod and Caesar, to the emperors and kings and princes and powerful? No, it is to a group of poor shepherds looking after their sheep out in a field. Where is the King born? In a palace surrounded by servants and gold? No, in a place where animals were kept, and He had as His first bed a manger--the feeding trough of an animal. The heavens themselves, seemingly, proclaimed the birth of the King, and yet it is not Herod, it is not the sages and learned men of Judea, it is not recognized by God's own people--but by foreigners.

We also can't ignore the prophetic significance of this.

These foreigners bringing gifts of gold and incense to the feet of Jesus, worshiping Him. It hearkens to the promise of God bringing the nations to Himself, it anticipates the going forth of the word of God, the preaching of the Gospel, to every nation and tribe. "Go forth and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit" "You will be My witnesses beginning in Jerusalem, through all of Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." "Preach the Gospel to every living creature"

It's not about God putting some stamp of approval on astrology. But it is about the unexpected ways in which God is fulfilling His promises.

Yes, it was a Hellenization of the Persian word Mobed, which does refer to the hereditary priesthood of the Zoroastrian religion, who perform a liturgical ritual called the Yasna which in some respects resembles the Eucharist in traditional churches (this combined with other similarities in events make me suspect that Zarathustra, as the Persians call Zoroaster, who they maintain was a sixth century prophet; scholars insist he must have come long before then based on the apparent age of the Avestan language, the holiest of two ancient Indo-Iraninan liturgical languages of the Zoroastrians, however, I feel we ought to listen to the practitioners of the language; perhaps Zoroaster reformed an older Persian religion closer to Hinduism (considering that Zoroastrianism uses the word devi to refer to demons rather than divinities, using a differnt word to refer to angels, and is also monotheistic); and I suspect it is quite possible he was a failed prophet, perhaps sent in the manner of Jonah to call the Persians to repentence, but who allowed aspects of the Hindu religion to survive and syncretized them (something we know later Christian missionaries occasionally engaged in, with disastrous results, for example the Jesuits in China, who, to the horror of the Dominican and Franciscan missionaries, permitted ancestor worship to continue; the controversy between the two groups led to the evil Kangxi Emperor prohibiting Christian missionary activity. More recently other compromises have been made, by different denominations, leading to scandals like the Pachamamba incident in the Vatican, condemnation of which by traditional Catholics is believed by many to have provoked Traditiones Custodes, and syncretism in the liberal mainline churches, which no longer actively engage in traditional evangelization.

peter2 · Friday at 11:22 PM

The Liturgist said:
St. Nicholas of Myra and St. Basil the Great, the two fourth century bishops on whom Santa Claus is based, absolutely are of God. St. Nicholas was one of the 318 Holy Fathers at the Council of Nicaea who upheld the Nicene Creed (which as a Catholic I would assume you are acquainted with) and the anathematization of Arius by St. Alexander the bishop of Alexandria. Additionally, before his episcopate, in the late third century, he used his own inheritance to provide the dowries for three girls whose father, who was a Christian, had lost his fortune, and felt that he had no choice but for his girls to enter into prostitution - St. Nicholas prevented that.

St Basil the Great was one of the Cappadocian fathers, the older brother of St. Gregory of Nyssa and the best friend of St. Gregory the Theologian (also known as St. Gregory of Nazianzus), a staunch defender of the Nicene Creed and opponent of Arianism, who used the treasury of his diocese (he was also a bishop, of Caesarea in Cappadocia), to build the first recognizable hospital open to anyone regardless of their ability to pay, along with a hostel for travelers and a hospice.

i thank you as well, for i'm little informed of hagiography. From Santa Claus, i only knew this stuff that parents make their children believe. And it's rather as regards this lie they temporarily teach them that i spoke of legend. But i didn't know about his hagiographic origin. I just thought there was a rivalry with the christian beliefs in Saint Nicholas and saint Basil whose feasts i supposed might have both become worldly ones.

The Liturgist said:
Monday we venerate the Archangels, Angels and Bodiless Powers

This paragraph is informative. Please could you tell me what you call bodiless powers ? (And are archangels and angels among them or different ? And, please, would you by chance know whether a power can both be bodiless and bodiful ?)

The Liturgist said:
In contrast, astrology is false and dangerous; the actual translation for Magi is a Zoroastrian priest, although the term was also used for priests from some Mesopotamian and Assyrian religions that had vague similarities, for example, Mandaeism, in which astrology does play a role, but only insofar as the planets are viewed as evil oppressors. And no one can convert to Mandaeism; it is a closed ethno-religious minority, severely persecuted.

Informative and protective, thank you

The Liturgist said:
Furthermore the idea that our Lord was influenced by what they said to him and by the Nunc Dimitis sung by St. Symeon is not mainstream; it implies our Lord was somehow inspired to become a Messiah by what people said about him at birth, rather than by the fact that He is the incarnate Son and Word of God, of one essence with the Father, begotten of the Father before all ages, who became man through the Blessed Virgin Mary being miraculously impregnated by the Holy Spirit while retaining her full and perpetual virginity.

Yes. I obviously doubt what i was inquiring for, and i hope i gonna be prudent enough : May be has God the Son had to learn to be a man and a creature, while he'd have been the Messiah from his birth up to his resurrection, and even before, and even after

The Liturgist · Saturday at 3:42 PM

peter2 said:
i thank you as well, for i'm little informed of hagiography. From Santa Claus, i only knew this stuff that parents make their children believe. And it's rather as regards this lie they temporarily teach them that i spoke of legend. But i didn't know about his hagiographic origin. I just thought there was a rivalry with the christian beliefs in Saint Nicholas and saint Basil whose feasts i supposed might have both become worldly ones.

St. Basil the Great and St. Nicholas of Myra were not worldly men, and as a result if properly venerated and properly remembered for who they are and what they stand for - loving our neighbor as ourself, loving Christ our God above all, their memory protects us from worldly temptations and shows us an exemplary demonstration of what the teachings of Christ look like when a human being follows them (which is also the case with the others venerated as saints in general - that is why we, the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodo, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Assyrians, Old Catholics and other traditional Christians, venerate them).

This paragraph is informative. Please could you tell me what you call bodiless powers ? (And are archangels and angels among them or different ? And, please, would you by chance know whether a power can both be bodiless and bodiful ?)

Essentially it refers to the different choirs of angels: Thrones, principalities, dominions and so on, all the way through to the humble but vital guardian angel, one of whom is assigned to all Christians on baptism. Angels, like demons, are purely pneumatic beings, that is to say, spiritual (they are not actually intelligent organizations of atmospheric pressure; the words spiritual and pneumatic predate a modern understanding of aerodynamics; indeed they are described as immaterial, which we know the air is not, so we have to accommodate a certain poetic usage; in describing the devil as “the prince of power of the air” St. Paul is not suggesting we could escape from demonic influence by making use of a vacuum chamber, rather the point was, like the holy angels, the demons are not bound by material constraints but can move around instantly and watch us wherever we are, the difference being, the angels are good, serve God, are a little higher than the default human condition, or rather we have fallen to the point of being “a little lower than the angels” in our default condition, but there are exceptions to this; it is said if an Orthodox Christian meets an angel and a priest he should greet the priest first, for the priest handles the Body and Blood of Christ our True God upon which the angel is not even allowed to look. But the holy angels are worthy of our veneration, and the archangels St. Michael, St. Gabriel and St. Raphael in particular have their actions described in detail in Scripture.

Now, demons frequently impersonate angels; an authentic angel will always refuse worship and direct one to worship God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and will not convey false doctrine; St. Paul warns us to test every spirit, so in the event you think you’ve encountered an angel (you probably haven’t, its probably either an hallucination, a demon, or a demonic hallucination), make the sign of the cross and see if it contradicts any obvious part of the Gospel; alas in the case of Muhammed, having only encountered some random extreme heretic, probably an Arian (recall Muhammed rejected the Trinity and believed it consisted of the Father, Son and the Virgin Mary, something an Arian heretic might say while denouncing the doctrine), he knew of St. Gabriel the Archangel but the “Jibreel” he encountered - having not actually read the Gospels, for he was illiterate and at the time I’m not sure if an Arabic translation even existed, so he would have been dependent on a Syriac, Greek or Coptic Christian to narrate them for him - since he had not encountered such a Christian or if he had, he had preferred the teachings of a heretic, he lacked the means to know that the entity who he claims fed him the first verses of the Quran (if that event even happened) was of a diabolical nature, and not St. Gabriel, which is a tragedy, for had he been open to the Gospel, he would have known the second the demon caused him to feel like he was being squeezed and quoting God referring to Himself in the third person, that it was an evil delusion, for in the entirety of Scripture we do not see St. Gabriel doing that, and third person dialogue of God is dialogical - in Genesis for example, it alludes to the collaboration between the three persons of the Holy and Undivided Trinity in the realization of creation.

Thus in summary, no angel will ever ask you to worship it or will contradict scripture; not all demons are Wagnerian and obvious in their presentation, most are terribly subtle, mundane, boring even.
[/quote]

Informative and protective, thank you

You are very welcome.

Yes. I obviously doubt what i was inquiring for, and i hope i gonna be prudent enough : May be has God the Son had to learn to be a man and a creature, while he'd have been the Messiah from his birth up to his resurrection, and even before, and even after

Well, remember, God is omniscient, and this is a property of the divine essence, which in the incarnation, according to the Nicene Creed and the early church, was united with our human nature in the person of Jesus Christ, who was fully God and fully man, without change, confusion, separation or division. So God the Son, Jesus Christ, was always omniscient - rather, the point of the Incarnation was provocatively described by Archpriest. John Behr, the former dean of St. Vladimir’s Seminary, the leading English language Orthodox graduate seminary in North America, and now the successor of Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, memory eternal, in reading Patristics and Eastern Christianity at Oxford University, as “God died on the Cross in order to show us what it means to be human.” He then characterized all of the great heresies as an attempt to deny this. Docetism? “Christ wasn’t really Man.” Arianism? “He wasn’t really God.” Nestorianism? “His deity and humanity were completely separate.” It was a rather good lecture you might enjoy, I know I did:

peter2 · Saturday at 9:26 PM

Hello Liturgist

The Liturgist said:
St. Basil the Great and St. Nicholas of Myra were not worldly men, and as a result if properly venerated and properly remembered for who they are and what they stand for - loving our neighbor as ourself, loving Christ our God above all, their memory protects us from worldly temptations and shows us an exemplary demonstration of what the teachings of Christ look like when a human being follows them (which is also the case with the others venerated as saints in general - that is why we, the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodo, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Assyrians, Old Catholics and other traditional Christians, venerate them).

I suppose you made the distinction : i didn't tell i believed both Saints were worldly, but that they were both worldly feasted.
i didn't knew of their lives and through what you wrote to me i now understand their christian veneration shouldn't be compared to the worldly belief surrounding Santa Claus. Thank you for informing me again

The Liturgist said:
Essentially it refers to the different choirs of angels: Thrones, principalities, dominions and so on, all the way through to the humble but vital guardian angel, one of whom is assigned to all Christians on baptism. Angels, like demons, are purely pneumatic beings, that is to say, spiritual (they are not actually intelligent organizations of atmospheric pressure; the words spiritual and pneumatic predate a modern understanding of aerodynamics; indeed they are described as immaterial, which we know the air is not, so we have to accommodate a certain poetic usage; in describing the devil as “the prince of power of the air” St. Paul is not suggesting we could escape from demonic influence by making use of a vacuum chamber, rather the point was, like the holy angels, the demons are not bound by material constraints but can move around instantly and watch us wherever we are, the difference being, the angels are good, serve God, are a little higher than the default human condition, or rather we have fallen to the point of being “a little lower than the angels” in our default condition, but there are exceptions to this; it is said if an Orthodox Christian meets an angel and a priest he should greet the priest first, for the priest handles the Body and Blood of Christ our True God upon which the angel is not even allowed to look. But the holy angels are worthy of our veneration, and the archangels St. Michael, St. Gabriel and St. Raphael in particular have their actions described in detail in Scripture.

Informative as always

The Liturgist said:
it is said if an Orthodox Christian meets an angel and a priest (...)

Please : why has such a scenario been imagined ? Indeed : It looks like such things happen only in the Scriptures..

The Liturgist said:
Now, demons frequently impersonate angels; an authentic angel will always refuse worship and direct one to worship God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and will not convey false doctrine; St. Paul warns us to test every spirit, so in the event you think you’ve encountered an angel (you probably haven’t, its probably either an hallucination, a demon, or a demonic hallucination), make the sign of the cross and see if it contradicts any obvious part of the Gospel; alas in the case of Muhammed, having only encountered some random extreme heretic, probably an Arian (recall Muhammed rejected the Trinity and believed it consisted of the Father, Son and the Virgin Mary, something an Arian heretic might say while denouncing the doctrine), he knew of St. Gabriel the Archangel but the “Jibreel” he encountered - having not actually read the Gospels, for he was illiterate and at the time I’m not sure if an Arabic translation even existed, so he would have been dependent on a Syriac, Greek or Coptic Christian to narrate them for him - since he had not encountered such a Christian or if he had, he had preferred the teachings of a heretic, he lacked the means to know that the entity who he claims fed him the first verses of the Quran (if that event even happened) was of a diabolical nature, and not St. Gabriel, which is a tragedy, for had he been open to the Gospel, he would have known the second the demon caused him to feel like he was being squeezed and quoting God referring to Himself in the third person, that it was an evil delusion, for in the entirety of Scripture we do not see St. Gabriel doing that, and third person dialogue of God is dialogical - in Genesis for example, it alludes to the collaboration between the three persons of the Holy and Undivided Trinity in the realization of creation.

Idem : Informative

The Liturgist said:
Well, remember, God is omniscient, and this is a property of the divine essence, which in the incarnation, according to the Nicene Creed and the early church, was united with our human nature in the person of Jesus Christ, who was fully God and fully man, without change, confusion, separation or division. So God the Son, Jesus Christ, was always omniscient

Yes you're right. One of the things that had first made me wonder whether Jesus might have been learning to be a man is how people from his own country were questionning themselves, in Mk 6 1-3 :

Then He went out from there and came to His own country, and His disciples followed Him. 2 And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue. And many hearing Him were astonished, saying, “Where did this Man get these things? And what wisdom is this which is given to Him, that such mighty works are performed by His hands! 3 Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are not His sisters here with us?” So they were offended at Him.

But both what you wrote (the preceeding quotation) and this scripture make me think it'd rather be the presence of the Holy Spirit in Jesus that was questionned, since Jesus add in the following verse :

4 But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own country, among his own relatives, and in his own house.”

Now, the Holy Spirit spoke through prophets as well, tells the Nicene creed.
He looks rejected in both cases (when speaking through Jesus and when speaking through the prophets)

The Liturgist said:
rather, the point of the Incarnation was provocatively described by Archpriest. John Behr, the former dean of St. Vladimir’s Seminary, the leading English language Orthodox graduate seminary in North America, and now the successor of Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, memory eternal, in reading Patristics and Eastern Christianity at Oxford University, as “God died on the Cross in order to show us what it means to be human.” He then characterized all of the great heresies as an attempt to deny this. Docetism? “Christ wasn’t really Man.” Arianism? “He wasn’t really God.” Nestorianism? “His deity and humanity were completely separate.” It was a rather good lecture you might enjoy, I know I did:

You are informative again. Sorry, it's been long since i listened to english speaking, and am far more easy at writing than at listening. I won't listen to the video

The Liturgist · 2026-01-11T02:22:09-0600

peter2 said:
Please : why has such a scenario been imagined ? Indeed : It looks like such things happen only in the Scriptures..

Well, such things are known to happen in the Orthodox Church. St. Nektarios of Pentapolis, who reposed in 2009, signed his name (in Greek) to the parish registry of a parish in rural Romania after celebrating the first Mass there for seven hears due to the clergy shortage in 2009, unbeknownst to the locals, who were delighted a bishop had for once appeared, for their parish had no clergy at all and many had gone unbaptized or unserved - the diocesan ordinary was quite upset and assumed someone was invading his jurisdiction in violation of the canon laws until he read the registrar…

The Liturgist · 2026-01-11T02:24:26-0600

peter2 said:
But both what you wrote (the preceeding quotation) and this scripture make me think it'd rather be the presence of the Holy Spirit in Jesus that was questionned, since Jesus add in the following verse :

The Holy Spirit is a distinct person from Christ, but coessential with Him, before and after Christ’s baptism in the Jordan, which was for our benefit, to create a means for us to receive the Spirit: both share in the Divine Essence of the Father. Apollinarius was a heretic who taught Jesus was a man with a divine soul, but this is bad Christology.

The Liturgist · 2026-01-11T02:26:01-0600

peter2 said:
You are informative again. Sorry, it's been long since i listened to english speaking, and am far more easy at writing than at listening. I won't listen to the video

No problem - it would be difficult for a non-English speaker. I can try to find something for you in French - you’re lucky in that Paris is home to a massive Orthodox community, many of them fluently or natively Francophone.

peter2 · 2026-01-11T05:45:25-0600

The Liturgist said:
Well, such things are known to happen in the Orthodox Church. St. Nektarios of Pentapolis, who reposed in 2009, signed his name (in Greek) to the parish registry of a parish in rural Romania after celebrating the first Mass there for seven hears due to the clergy shortage in 2009, unbeknownst to the locals, who were delighted a bishop had for once appeared, for their parish had no clergy at all and many had gone unbaptized or unserved - the diocesan ordinary was quite upset and assumed someone was invading his jurisdiction in violation of the canon laws until he read the registrar…

I suppose you meant he reposed in 1920, as i saw on wikipedia
But, sorry, i fail to see what his signature in a registry has to do with my inquest of

peter2 said:
why has such a scenario ((involving a christian, a priest and an angel)) been imagined ?

,, however miraculous his signing the register in 2009 obviously is

The Liturgist said:
The Holy Spirit is a distinct person from Christ, but coessential with Him, before and after Christ’s baptism in the Jordan, which was for our benefit, to create a means for us to receive the Spirit: both share in the Divine Essence of the Father.

i suppose catholic creed consists in this too

The Liturgist said:
Apollinarius was a heretic who taught Jesus was a man with a divine soul, but this is bad Christology.

Idem

The Liturgist said:
I can try to find something for you in French

why not, if you can find something short (even in french i no longer read long text). If not, i shall ask chatgpt to make a résumé. Anyway, thank you

The Liturgist said:
No problem - it would be difficult for a non-English speaker. I can try to find something for you in French - you’re lucky in that Paris is home to a massive Orthodox community, many of them fluently or natively Francophone.

Great! But it 'd likely not be an opportunity, for i'm a provincial person, and i try and avoid Paris, his traffic jams exasperates me.

The Liturgist · 2026-01-12T00:11:41-0600

peter2 said:
i suppose catholic creed consists in this too

Probably, and hopefully; the Orthodox fears concerning the filioque in the Nicene Creed among other things, depersonalization of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit being reduced to a shared property of the Father and Son; and a loss of the role of the Father as the unoriginate source of the Divine Essence of the uncreated and coequal Som and Holy Spirit, and additionally, this reducing the Divine Essence to a shared property of the divine persons; in a worst caee scenario the unoriginate essence of God could be confused with the uncreated person of the Holy Spirit, who proceeds in our theology from the Father and who with the Son shares in the essence of the unoriginate Father, three distinct coeternal coequal persons in an eternal union of perfect love, ever one God.

We believe we are called to be an living icon of this eternal trinity in unity, in our relations with other humans in our homes, the Church, our neighbors, and humanity as a whole.

After all, if God will put on our nature to die for us, should we not be willing to do the same for our neighbor?

The Liturgist · 2026-01-12T00:15:58-0600

peter2 said:
I suppose you meant he reposed in 1920, as i saw on wikipedia
But, sorry, i fail to see what his signature in a registry has to do with my inquest of

,, however miraculous his signing the register in 2009 obviously is

i suppose catholic creed consists in this too

Idem

why not, if you can find something short (even in french i no longer read long text). If not, i shall ask chatgpt to make a résumé. Anyway, thank you

Great! But it 'd likely not be an opportunity, for i'm a provincial person, and i try and avoid Paris, his traffic jams exasperates me.

Ah let me clarify - no need to enter Paris - my point was the center of the French language also became a center for Orthodoxy, beginning with Russian emigres fleeing the Soviet Union. From there, Francophone Orthodox diffused throughout France and many live in the US. Indeed there is a French Orthodox priest at a local monastery of the Orthodox Church in America (a multiethnic denomination that primarily worships in English, that also includes all the Russian Orthodox among the Native Alaskans (Aleuts and other indigenous peoples), all the Albanian Orthodox emigres, half of the Romanians, half of the Bulgarians and a large chunk of the American converts.

peter2 · 2026-01-12T02:53:48-0600

The Liturgist said:
Probably, and hopefully; the Orthodox fears concerning the filioque in the Nicene Creed among other things, depersonalization of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit being reduced to a shared property of the Father and Son; and a loss of the role of the Father as the unoriginate source of the Divine Essence of the uncreated and coequal Som and Holy Spirit, and additionally, this reducing the Divine Essence to a shared property of the divine persons; in a worst caee scenario the unoriginate essence of God could be confused with the uncreated person of the Holy Spirit, who proceeds in our theology from the Father and who with the Son shares in the essence of the unoriginate Father, three distinct coeternal coequal persons in an eternal union of perfect love, ever one God.

We believe we are called to be an living icon of this eternal trinity in unity, in our relations with other humans in our homes, the Church, our neighbors, and humanity as a whole.

After all, if God will put on our nature to die for us, should we not be willing to do the same for our neighbor?

I know catholics believe a mystery lies into Trinity. I'm a bad example of circonspection since i often try and unravel the mysteries. Indeed, i always seek for a feeling of security in truth, and a mystery is obviously for me a source of insecurity. So, it teaches me to stand confident. However, since i'm little sensible, i try my best to find what lies behind this mystery as well. But, for what Orthodox fear, even if i d'like to bring response, i've got no other one than this Jesus replied to those who were asking for a sign. Not sure it's relevant here, however

The Liturgist said:
Ah let me clarify - no need to enter Paris - my point was the center of the French language also became a center for Orthodoxy, beginning with Russian emigres fleeing the Soviet Union. From there, Francophone Orthodox diffused throughout France and many live in the US. Indeed there is a French Orthodox priest at a local monastery of the Orthodox Church in America (a multiethnic denomination that primarily worships in English, that also includes all the Russian Orthodox among the Native Alaskans (Aleuts and other indigenous peoples), all the Albanian Orthodox emigres, half of the Romanians, half of the Bulgarians and a large chunk of the American converts.

Thank you for your clarifyfing, but i think we misunderstood, and i' m still more puzzled. Let's forget it

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Please : Do they know of which astrological sign was Jesus ?

Confessional Lutheran

Ordinary life contemplative

Newbie

Ordinary life contemplative

Ordinary life contemplative

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Ordinary life contemplative

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Ordinary life contemplative

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Ordinary life contemplative

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Ordinary life contemplative

Similar threads