I beg for correction.

[eoe]

I am asking for correction on THIS thread. If anyone thinks that I am mistaken or that I have acted poorly please let me know so that I can apologize.

I believe that our faith is being attacked and misrepresented. If I am wrong I need to be corrected.

 

[Mark Downham]

John

You are deeply LOVED.

Mark

 

[Teke]

How about specifics. That thread is 13 pages. I read the first page and see the OP is already wrong on the Spirit. Then I read the last page and see your post stating the poster is wrong about EO.

So if the first post began wrong, the whole thread is likely wrong from this persons view.

Specifics................

 

[eoe]

I am unable to see the posts anymore but if you go back 1-2 pages you will see images of bees - go to the beginning of that multi-post and start there. Specifically the parts where this user makes claims about the Orthodox faith.

I am not concerned with him giving his own view - my problem is when he gives "our" view and when he sates his purpose.

 

[Orthocat]

They speak gnostic thoughts. I could compare every comment with gnostic texts and the critiques of such but suffice to say...

You did well to say goodbye.

The protestant world has slipped more and more into the gnosticism the fathers fought against.

 

[Mark Downham]

.

 

[Mark Downham]

.

 

[Orthocat]

Christian Gnosticism is the belief that one must have a "gnosis" (from Greek "Gnosko," to know) or inner knowledge which is mystical knowledge obtained only after one has been properly initiated (or "born again" or "filled with the Spirit" or "baptized in the Spirit"). Only a few can possess this mystical knowledge, limiting the number of those "in the know" (such as those who "speak in tongues" as opposed to those that don't). It is a heresy that Paul battled against in some of his letters to the churches and was soundly condemned as a heresy in the first century church (40-100 A.D.). It is resurrected today as the forerunner to the New Age Religion where virtually anything goes and "religion" takes on many forms, especially the mystic Eastern religions that are so prevalent today. Many churches today teach it as how we can all learn from each other things previously hidden and how we can all be as one - illuminated.

Gnosticism today seems to provide a lot of the form and color for the New Age portrait of Jesus where Jesus is seen as the illumined Illuminator: one who serves as a cosmic catalyst for others' awakening. As such it is as false and h-------l as the Gnosticism of the first century and needs to be roundly condemned for the h-----y that it is.



It is found in speaking of "cross-pollination" where illumined ideas all join together to create some more beautiful thing. Persons being filled with illumination and light due to knowledge and/or "revelation" - these are all gnostic concepts....and they are certainly not Orthodox concepts.
I will not go into debate on this....my words and mind are too simple for explanation of matters like this and I am better off in prayer.
There is a book by an Anglican priest however, "Against the Protestant Gnostics" which actually discusses much of what was discussed in the other thread. Perhaps it can help you in your understanding.

May God bless and keep you in your journey.

 

[Teke]

Teke

Hi. I am interested in this comment. Would you please extrapolate with a supporting heremeneutical exegesis.

Love.

Mark (the OP)

You made the statement in your opening post, "when you are filled with the Holy Spirit".
I see your an Anglican, don't you hold to Trinity doctrine and dogma then?

Perhaps it was just a random statement. But if you hold to Trinity theology, you know that no person is filled with the Holy Spirit.

Then you said, "you become a living synergy". Boy will that fuel the Protestant mindset that it is all about them alone. Myself having formerly been a Protestant can tell you most assuredly this a misleading statement to say the least. Especially coupled with what you said before that.

Then you further the YOU thought with more "you"s.
Do you believe you become your own pope and church?

I believe your missing what synergism means with your use of the word "you".

Maybe you don't need a "heremeneutical exegesis" but a biblical exegesis on holy spirit in the Greek. That coupled with Trinity doctrine should clear things up for you and give you a clear heremeneutic.

 

[Teke]

Christian Gnosticism is the belief that one must have a "gnosis" (from Greek "Gnosko," to know) or inner knowledge which is mystical knowledge obtained only after one has been properly initiated (or "born again" or "filled with the Spirit" or "baptized in the Spirit"). Only a few can possess this mystical knowledge, limiting the number of those "in the know" (such as those who "speak in tongues" as opposed to those that don't). It is a heresy that Paul battled against in some of his letters to the churches and was soundly condemned as a heresy in the first century church (40-100 A.D.). It is resurrected today as the forerunner to the New Age Religion where virtually anything goes and "religion" takes on many forms, especially the mystic Eastern religions that are so prevalent today. Many churches today teach it as how we can all learn from each other things previously hidden and how we can all be as one - illuminated.

Gnosticism today seems to provide a lot of the form and color for the New Age portrait of Jesus where Jesus is seen as the illumined Illuminator: one who serves as a cosmic catalyst for others' awakening. As such it is as false and h-------l as the Gnosticism of the first century and needs to be roundly condemned for the h-----y that it is.



It is found in speaking of "cross-pollination" where illumined ideas all join together to create some more beautiful thing. Persons being filled with illumination and light due to knowledge and/or "revelation" - these are all gnostic concepts....and they are certainly not Orthodox concepts.
I will not go into debate on this....my words and mind are too simple for explanation of matters like this and I am better off in prayer.
There is a book by an Anglican priest however, "Against the Protestant Gnostics" which actually discusses much of what was discussed in the other thread. Perhaps it can help you in your understanding.

May God bless and keep you in your journey.

I'm in agreement with you on this . And I have the book, so I know what your speaking of.

 

[Mark Downham]

.

 

[Mark Downham]

.

 

[Teke]

Teke

Thank you.

Acts 2:4a All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit

Love.

Mark

If that is your defense it's weak to say the least. I gave you some good advice, you should check it out. (BTW the verse says "all of them")

I also told you I'm a former Protestant, so I can play the scripture game with you till the cows come home, if you want to go that route. (tho it'd be a vicious cycle leading nowhere)

Self professing logic and reason with scripture helps no one. The scriptures tell you "study". And it doesn't say study only scripture.

 

[Argent]

Christian Gnosticism is the belief that one must have a "gnosis" (from Greek "Gnosko," to know) or inner knowledge which is mystical knowledge obtained only after one has been properly initiated (or "born again" or "filled with the Spirit" or "baptized in the Spirit"). Only a few can possess this mystical knowledge, limiting the number of those "in the know" (such as those who "speak in tongues" as opposed to those that don't). It is a heresy that Paul battled against in some of his letters to the churches and was soundly condemned as a heresy in the first century church (40-100 A.D.). It is resurrected today as the forerunner to the New Age Religion where virtually anything goes and "religion" takes on many forms, especially the mystic Eastern religions that are so prevalent today. Many churches today teach it as how we can all learn from each other things previously hidden and how we can all be as one - illuminated.

Gnosticism today seems to provide a lot of the form and color for the New Age portrait of Jesus where Jesus is seen as the illumined Illuminator: one who serves as a cosmic catalyst for others' awakening. As such it is as false and h-------l as the Gnosticism of the first century and needs to be roundly condemned for the h-----y that it is.



It is found in speaking of "cross-pollination" where illumined ideas all join together to create some more beautiful thing. Persons being filled with illumination and light due to knowledge and/or "revelation" - these are all gnostic concepts....and they are certainly not Orthodox concepts.
I will not go into debate on this....my words and mind are too simple for explanation of matters like this and I am better off in prayer.
There is a book by an Anglican priest however, "Against the Protestant Gnostics" which actually discusses much of what was discussed in the other thread. Perhaps it can help you in your understanding.

May God bless and keep you in your journey.

My brother, your error here is in equating all this, this "gnosticism", with "protestantism." I will grant you that it does, much to my dismay, describe what I see in the Episcopal Church USA, as well as in some congregations of other so-called "mainline" protestant denominations. It most certainly does NOT describe evangelical protestants, such as my Southern Baptist Convention church. In as much as we emphasize a "personal realtionship" with Jesus, it is the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Spirit's leading, then confirmed against the Holy Scriptures, that are the basis for our beliefs, not some sort of "personal experience" combined with the personal experiences of others providing some sort of communal "illumination."

I believe that the Orthodox Chruch and the conservative Baptist churches agree on the essentials of the faith. Beyond that, the differences in style of worship, church organization, religious symbols or historical view are to be respected and not criticized. As to criticize each other on the non-essentials of the faith will only lead to division.

I am not in agreement with much of what passes for theology in the Anglican Communion these days (as well as in a lot of other self-proclaimed Christian churches), but you are in error to lump all protestants together when you encounter one with whom you, and I, disagree.

Peace and blessings to you in our Lord and Savior, Jesus, the Christ.

Argent

 

[kamikat]

I really hate to see someone who is not Orthodox, a catechumen or even an inquirer, go on and on about Orthodoxy. How can he possibly understand the theology without being part of the church life? We've seen it written here on TAW over and over, you can know Orthodoxy from books, it must be lived.
BTW, the language used in that forum just gives me the creeps. Alot of it sounds very similar to the way people talked when I was involved in non-Christian religions.
kamikat

 

[Shubunkin]

I am asking for correction on THIS thread. If anyone thinks that I am mistaken or that I have acted poorly please let me know so that I can apologize.

I believe that our faith is being attacked and misrepresented. If I am wrong I need to be corrected.

You were not wrong. I read those posts, and it is so similar to what I learned in Pentecostalism. I was badly burned there, believe me. It is the leaven, not "cross pollination" suggested.... please don't believe you were wrong!

 

[Shubunkin]

One more thing... which took me a long time to realize years ago... you can't tell God what to do, nor command him to do something. A Christian must pray with humbleness of heart and spirit. I learned all of this the hard way.

 

[Teke]

My brother, your error here is in equating all this, this "gnosticism", with "protestantism." I will grant you that it does, much to my dismay, describe what I see in the Episcopal Church USA, as well as in some congregations of other so-called "mainline" protestant denominations. It most certainly does NOT describe evangelical protestants, such as my Southern Baptist Convention church. In as much as we emphasize a "personal realtionship" with Jesus, it is the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Spirit's leading, then confirmed against the Holy Scriptures, that are the basis for our beliefs, not some sort of "personal experience" combined with the personal experiences of others providing some sort of communal "illumination."

I believe that the Orthodox Chruch and the conservative Baptist churches agree on the essentials of the faith. Beyond that, the differences in style of worship, church organization, religious symbols or historical view are to be respected and not criticized. As to criticize each other on the non-essentials of the faith will only lead to division.

I am not in agreement with much of what passes for theology in the Anglican Communion these days (as well as in a lot of other self-proclaimed Christian churches), but you are in error to lump all protestants together when you encounter one with whom you, and I, disagree.

Peace and blessings to you in our Lord and Savior, Jesus, the Christ.

Argent

That is debateable depending on what Baptist church one attends. I was formerly a Baptist (southern) and have watched the decline in the past three decades in Baptist churchs.

I now see them as mainly Protestants, tho they were not always that way as I know from experience.

I could still agree to most of the old teachings, but not the new which are more in line with the general Protestant mindset.

To the Baptist credit, I have encountered many Orthodox who studied in Baptist seminaries. And I will testify of the historical teachings they teach, but only teach to a point.
There are also many Orthodox who find the Baptist method of teaching (history) very good and draw from the example.

But it was only part of the whole as I later came to find. Then I stepped out into my own "individual soul liberty" (Baptist doctrine). And was happy to find the Orhtodox do accept the sacrament of baptism by any denomination.

So I must thank the historic Baptist for getting me on the historic road of truth to the Church.
Thank you

I hope you are a historic Baptist (more than a southern or any other).

 

[The Prokeimenon!]

We'd all do well to avoid that "prophetic ministry" hotbed of demonic activity. Just my opinion.

Rdr Moses

 

[Argent]

That is debateable depending on what Baptist church one attends. I was formerly a Baptist (southern) and have watched the decline in the past three decades in Baptist churchs.

I now see them as mainly Protestants, tho they were not always that way as I know from experience.

I could still agree to most of the old teachings, but not the new which are more in line with the general Protestant mindset.

To the Baptist credit, I have encountered many Orthodox who studied in Baptist seminaries. And I will testify of the historical teachings they teach, but only teach to a point.
There are also many Orthodox who find the Baptist method of teaching (history) very good and draw from the example.

But it was only part of the whole as I later came to find. Then I stepped out into my own "individual soul liberty" (Baptist doctrine). And was happy to find the Orhtodox do accept the sacrament of baptism by any denomination.

So I must thank the historic Baptist for getting me on the historic road of truth to the Church.
Thank you

I hope you are a historic Baptist (more than a southern or any other).

Well, you're certainly welcome and thank you.

Although, I've never heard of "historic Baptist". So, I'm not really sure what the disctinction are that you are making between them and "southern" and the others (I assume you mean "American Baptist" and the National Baptist Convention. Neither with which I agree.) Could you clarify, please?