One is in error, and I can prove it.

[simonthezealot]

1. Church of Hedonism (I don't think that one is yours)
2. Baptist
3. Pentacostal
4. Greek Orthodox (which I don't think you claim as yours either)

2 kinda falls in line!

Appears you've dealt with a lil confusion in your life! that is okay, a day will come where you won't need all the sacramental ritualistic manners to help you develop your spiritual self, I applaud you for not being affraid to view other doctrines of religion and Christianity and not settling on what you feel you were born and entitled to. The surest way to a spiritual revival is studying the "Word of God"
Have a good day and gear it to Matt 6:33

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

reposting for your convenince.

question.

Did Jesus dwell among sinners?

does he live in sinners now?

do sinners partake of him regularly?

do sinners commune with him?

do sinners call him friend?

Jesus lived with, ate with, befriended sinners.

he lives within us now, and none of us are sinless.

the "neccessity" that Mary be sinless to bear Christ is an out and out falsehood.

Absolutely.
Nevertheless, her life seems to bear perfect witness to , well, perfection.

As for those who claim that only Chist is perfection, what do you do with Paul's admonition "let us go on to perfection" or "until we ALL come to fulness and the measure of the stature of Christ."

As for those who say that only Christ is righteous, what do you do with the sciptural statement that Job was righteous/blameless?
And if Job was, then what of the woman who was chosen to bear the Logos- but not only to bear Him, but to bring Him forth.

No, I think that the West errs greatly, one side arguing for an unnecessary definition of perfection and sinlessness, the other dismissing the fulness of Theosis by falsely making all equal in thhe sight of God. Oh, we're created equal, but we don't end up that way. I know that offends some who think they're as great as Mary and etc etc, but they are greatly confused as to what Christ came here for- not just fire insurance, but many sons to glory- ie, Theosis. As Saint Athanasius said, God becam man that we might become like Him. Or, as Paul said, the very Creation groans awaiting the revelealing of the Sons of God.

Please don't confuse this with latter rain theology. I am speaking of what Protestants atificially and inaccurately refer to as sancification (the error is in separating this from justfication).
How's that for a rant?
Have nice day, comrade

 

[tulc]

As for those who claim that only Chist is perfection, what do you do with Paul's admonition "let us go on to perfection" or "until we ALL come to fulness and the measure of the stature of Christ."

Do with it? I do the best I can and realize until I'm standing before Gods throne those scriptures wont be fulfilled.

As for those who say that only Christ is righteous, what do you do with the sciptural statement that Job was righteous/blameless?

I'd say that Job maintained he was righteous until he actually was confronted by God, then he called himself vile.

And if Job was, then what of the woman who was chosen to bear the Logos- but not only to bear Him, but to bring Him forth.

See it's when people say things like this, that's what makes the little hairs on the back of my neck stand up in alarme.

No, I think that the West errs greatly, one side arguing for an unnecessary definition of perfection and sinlessness, the other dismissing the fulness of Theosis by falsely making all equal in thhe sight of God. Oh, we're created equal, but we don't end up that way. I know that offends some who think they're as great as Mary and etc etc, but they are greatly confused as to what Christ came here for- not just fire insurance, but many sons to glory- ie, Theosis. As Saint Athanasius said, God becam man that we might become like Him. Or, as Paul said, the very Creation groans awaiting the revelealing of the Sons of God.

I don't know, I've always LIKED the idea that Jesus loves me like He loved His mom, but again, that's just me.

How's that for a rant?

You call that a rant? If it was a REAL RANT (tm) it would have used more CAPITOLS, and BOLDS maybe thrown in a few "!!!!" here and there, and then used my personal favorite "but brother have you considered "X""? Now THAT would have been a REAL RANT (tm) As it was that was just a reasonable and clear headed explanation of what you believe. Honestly? It wasn't even in the same neighborhood of a rant.

Have nice day, comrade

You too brother!
tulc(who knows rants, oh yes he does!)

 

[Mary of Bethany]

Do with it? I do the best I can and realize until I'm standing before Gods throne those scriptures wont be fulfilled.

I'd say that Job maintained he was righteous until he actually was confronted by God, then he called himself vile.

See it's when people say things like this, that's what makes the little hairs on the back of my neck stand up in alarme.

I don't know, I've always LIKED the idea that Jesus loves me like He loved His mom, but again, that's just me.

You call that a rant? If it was a REAL RANT (tm) it would have used more CAPITOLS, and BOLDS maybe thrown in a few "!!!!" here and there, and then used my personal favorite "but brother have you considered "X""? Now THAT would have been a REAL RANT (tm) As it was that was just a reasonable and clear headed explanation of what you believe. Honestly? It wasn't even in the same neighborhood of a rant.

You too brother!
tulc(who knows rants, oh yes he does!)

Tulc,

for someone who's always drinking coffee, you sure are laid back! lol

Mary

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Still no answer to post #74.

Forgive me...

 

[repentant]

Question..

If Mary was immaculity conceived, and was without any sin, including original sin (RCC view), then why did she need a Savior? Christ came to free us from the bonds of death which resulted from Adam's sin, so if Mary was born without it, why did she need Him?

 

[Silouan]

Now remind me here: the Immaculate Conception is that Mary was born free of original sin, right?
tulc(just trying to see if I remember this right)

Yes, this is correct

 

[ScottBot]

Question..

If Mary was immaculity conceived, and was without any sin, including original sin (RCC view), then why did she need a Savior? Christ came to free us from the bonds of death which resulted from Adam's sin, so if Mary was born without it, why did she need Him?

Because she was saved pre-emptively. God can do that, if He deems it necessary.

The basis of the IC is found in the word that St. Luke used to describe her at the annunciation, kecharitomene, which is the perfect present participle of "to fill with grace", and literally means that she was fulled with grace through her entire life, not simply from the moment that Gabriel made the announcement. He wasn't declaring her full of grace, but rather recognizing the grace filled condition that already existed.

I know that the Orthodox and Catholic traditions differ on the nature of the sin of Adam and Eve and what we inherited from them (Orthodox believing in ancient sin, Catholic believing in original sin, although for the life of me I find it hard to distinguish the two as ancient means "really old" and original means "from the point of origin", therefore both point to the sin of Adam.) I think it mostly lies in the West's reliance on Augustine of Hippos exhortation on the nature of the sin of Adam and the transferance of "guilt", which is not taught in the East.

I tend to prefer Augustine's perspective, because 9in my thinking) transference of Adam's guilt necessitates baptism for the removal of this sin. In the understanding of anicent sin (if I remember correctly) Adam's sin created the temporal condition of death and a disobedient nature. Although I am probably missing a few connecting links, this is why Pelagius fell into error. He believed that because we don't inherit the guilt of Adam, then we ourselves under our own power can attain salvation under our own merit, thereby making Christ an example to live by, but not a divine atoning sacrifice.

Now, please don't think that I am trying to make the case that Pelagius fell into error because of the Orthodox understanding of Adam's sin, I think Pelagius misunderstood it. I think that it is symptomatic of the the East and the West talking past each other because of our differing paradigms of theological understanding, with the East being more mystical (allowing the unexplanable to remain unexplained) and the West being more scholastic (attempting to explain the unexplainable).

 

[IamAdopted]

How does one who is "sinless" die?

For the wages of sin are death. (A natural old age death as well.)

Busted.

Forgive me...

Correct.. All Humans will die.. Not of our own free will but because this is what Happened when sin entered.. Our natural bodies Die and go back to the earth for which we were created.. Only one did not suffer decay and that was Jesus for He was before He came and there was no Sin in Him. If the Lord raptures us before we die our bodies will be changed in the twinkling of an eye.. It is that fast.. We have to disgaurd this only Body that has been conceived in sin..

 

[ScottBot]

How does one who is "sinless" die?

For the wages of sin are death. (A natural old age death as well.)

Busted.

Forgive me...

Jesus was sinless and He died....


BUSTED.

 

[IamAdopted]

Jesus was sinless and He died....


BUSTED.

Well We have to see that if He had not layed His life down for all of us He probably wouldn't have because Jesus said that No one could take His life from Him.. That He willingly layed it down. He never suffered decay. He rose again on the third day. We will see this happen again when the two witnesses come and are killed.. God will also raise them in Three days..

 

[ScottBot]

Well We have to see that if He had not layed His life down for all of us He probably wouldn't have because Jesus said that No one could take His life from Him.. That He willingly layed it down. He never suffered decay. He rose again on the third day. We will see this happen again when the two witnesses come and are killed.. God will also raise them in Three days..

Did Jesus die or not?

And there are examples of both Catholic and Orthodox saints who died a long time ago and who's bodies remain uncorrupted. Not even OrthodoxUSA will argue with that one.

 

[IamAdopted]

Did Jesus die or not?

And there are examples of both Catholic and Orthodox saints who died a long time ago and who's bodies remain uncorrupted. Not even OrthodoxUSA will argue with that one.

Did He die a natural death? Did He die because of His sin? Or did He lay His life down for His sheep? So that with His death we may have eternal life?

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Jesus was sinless and He died....


BUSTED.

Oh.... You got me!

Forgive me...

 

[ScottBot]

Did He die a natural death? Did He die because of His sin? Or did He lay His life down for His sheep? So that with His death we may have eternal life?

yes, He laid down His life as expiation for sin. He still died though, and He is still sinless.

Regardless, Christ's passion and death do NOT remove the temporal effect of physical death. There are only 2 biblical examples of people being taken up into heaven before their physical deaths, Enoch and Elijah. Were they sinless?

 

[Silouan]

reposting for your convenince.

question.

Did Jesus dwell among sinners?

does he live in sinners now?

do sinners partake of him regularly?

do sinners commune with him?

do sinners call him friend?

Jesus lived with, ate with, befriended sinners.

he lives within us now, and none of us are sinless.

the "neccessity" that Mary be sinless to bear Christ is an out and out falsehood.

I suggest you read the anathemas or charges against Nestorian in the Third Ecuminical Council of 431 which also defends the use of Theotokos (God bearer) as the proper title for Mary the mother of God. This may help bring some clarity into why the veneration of Mary is a part of incarnational theology. Hope this helps.

 

[IamAdopted]

Did Jesus die or not?

And there are examples of both Catholic and Orthodox saints who died a long time ago and who's bodies remain uncorrupted. Not even OrthodoxUSA will argue with that one.

We still have the two witnesses to come and die.. They probably are Enoch and Elijah..

 

[sunlover1]

We're comparing apples with oranges, if
comparing God with people.

Just thought I'd mention that.

 

[Uphill Battle]

I suggest you read the anathemas or charges against Nestorian in the Third Ecuminical Council of 431 which also defends the use of Theotokos (God bearer) as the proper title for Mary the mother of God. This may help bring some clarity into why the veneration of Mary is a part of incarnational theology. Hope this helps.

got a link?

anyways, I have no problem with the term Theotokos. I once did. No longer.

 

[Silouan]

got a link?

anyways, I have no problem with the term Theotokos. I once did. No longer.

It wont let me post a link, but if you go to Christian Classics Ethereal Library, Early Church Father, there wil be a link to the Seven Ecumenical Councils. There you will be able to select the Third Ecumenical Council to read it in its entirety.