Trappists?

[EastCoastRemnant]

and again I say


This particular point wasn't even available to 'the church' until the last 500 years. I'm of the persuasion that God's provision for our ability to succeed as Christians has been replaced by bibliolatry and denominationalism. Both of which has let being "led of the Spirit" in the proverbial dust.

We are judged based on the light we are given and if we followed that light. Yes, we have the scriptures and so much more at our disposal today to search these things diligently from the Bible that we be not ashamed.

 

[Hillsage]

Thank you for bringing up that good definition. Now here's the difference between the East and the West. In the East, if a penance is given by the priest, it is not for punishment, but for curing the soul of its sinful desires.

Where does that "medicine" come from in scripture?

On the other hand, a penance such as "turn off the TV for 2 weeks and read the Bible" given to someone who has a habit of watching naughty films on HBO might go a long way further in helping that soul to heal, n'est ce pas?

That was never my penance, it was ALWAYS "Make a good Act of Contrition and say yada yada yada prayers."

Very true. This is what we in the East refer to as "theosis" and it is a major teaching of the Eastern churches. It is referred to as "divinization" in the Roman Church, but it is hardly ever taught or spoken about. What is in the front of that Church is the punishment of God for various sins and how to pray some prayer or do some act so as to get out of getting a whuppin.

The only whuppin I feel like I have to get anymore is like last week when I had to confront a brother from a church I went to 7 years ago. The last time we talked at McDonalds, the week before, he got frustrated with me. As he turned and walked away he made a comment about something I'd offended him with years ago when we were in the same church. It shocked me, was it even true. I took it before the Lord. "YEP you need to apologize" CRAP that whuppin hurts. I'm still stewing about it when I run in to, 'not just him', but his whole family at McDonold's 2 days later (I haven't seen him in years, what's the odds?). OK God this is a set up for me to step down...in humility and go apologize. Which I did. No saying a good Act of Contrition, no Our Father and THANK my PROTESTANT conversion no Hail Mary.... Sorry bro.

 

[Hillsage]

We are judged based on the light we are given and if we followed that light. Yes, we have the scriptures and so much more at our disposal today to search these things diligently from the Bible that we be not ashamed.

But that point is up to God and not man according to Paul in Romans. Paul spends 13 chapters in Romans tell US how to do it right. But then in chapter 14, when you run into a brother who isn't doing it YOUR WAY of right, what does he tell us to do? Paul says "welcome him but not for arguments over opinions/DOCTRINE. SAY WHAT!!!! "Because God HAS (past tense) welcomed him and is able to make him stand." So I'm of the persuasion that I receive you as a brother and let God judge as to the stinkin thinkin doctrines of religious legalisms....as well as my own 'admitted' heretical beliefs (according to ORTHODOXY).

But walking in SIN, I take a hard stand on. Just an hour ago a 'single' sister from our last church came in to say she'd been laid off after 26 years, at age 64. Then one of the 3 who fired her starts calling her because they can't do her job and they keep asking her how. She keeps helping them. She does so even after she was counseled from one of the church pastors as well as members to tell them NO, or to demand consultation pay. She said I can't do that. I agreed, and told her their motivations come from one source, and it is not God IMO. She said I can only do what my heart is telling me to do, and I help them. I told her that her heart is God's heart and to keep doing so. You trust Him to provide for you OR to take any vengeance against them for any wrong in what they did in letting her go.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

But walking in SIN, I take a hard stand on. Just an hour ago a 'single' sister from our last church came in to say she'd been laid off after 26 years, at age 64. Then one of the 3 who fired her starts calling her because they can't do her job and they keep asking her how. She keeps helping them. She does so even after she was counseled from one of the church pastors as well as members to tell them NO, or to demand consultation pay. She said I can't do that. I agreed, and told her their motivations come from one source, and it is not God IMO. She said I can only do what my heart is telling me to do, and I help them. I told her that her heart is God's heart and to keep doing so. You trust Him to provide for you OR to take any vengeance against them for any wrong in what they did in letting her go.

Walking by faith is one of the hardest things we do as Christians... I pray the sister be blessed for her faithfulness.

When you mentioned taking a hard stand on sin, that is what I was referring to... I live by what 1 John 3:4 states...

1 John 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Breaking the 4th Commandment is sin just as breaking the 6th is sin.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

The only whuppin I feel like I have to get anymore is like last week when I had to confront a brother from a church I went to 7 years ago. The last time we talked at McDonalds, the week before, he got frustrated with me. As he turned and walked away he made a comment about something I'd offended him with years ago when we were in the same church. It shocked me, was it even true. I took it before the Lord. "YEP you need to apologize" CRAP that whuppin hurts. I'm still stewing about it when I run in to, 'not just him', but his whole family at McDonold's 2 days later (I haven't seen him in years, what's the odds?). OK God this is a set up for me to step down...in humility and go apologize. Which I did. No saying a good Act of Contrition, no Our Father and THANK my PROTESTANT conversion no Hail Mary.... Sorry bro.

Praise the Lord for your conviction and surrender!!

 

[chilehed]

While we in the East agree that we are not "saved once and for all and forever" as Fundamentalist and Evangelical people would state after making a decision for Jesus, the overall view of God in the Roman Church is one of an angry Judge rather than a healing Father.

You are gravely mistaken.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Just a comment on the OP - it may have been under discussion in the Orthodox forum but this is not an Orthodox prayer nor does it quite accurately reflect our theology (at the very least it suggests things we do not agree with). I believe it is a Catholic Saint's prayer. Just FTR.


And while I have not read the entire thread, it seems there may be other misconceptions as to what Orthodox believe as well.

I saw this in the Orthodox forum, but had some questions about it, I pasted it in google and some Catholic religious order popped up and it s related to a sacrament of some kind. I'm just curious what you think of it, all the scripture that came to remembrance in regards to it was on the negative side, would like to see other people's perspectives as well.
.
"I answer Your call. Here I am" I desire nothing, from now , but Your holy Will, and Your divine Heart will be the altar of my immolation. Yes, it is in the furnace of love that I desire to see consumed all that remains of myself, in order that I may no longer be myself but You, O Jesus. Continue in this heart, which belongs to You, the tortures of Calvary, for as long as this new victim is not immolated, Your Sacrifice will be unfinished. Your work of redemption incomplete."

 

[Light of the East]

Where does that "medicine" come from in scripture?

It comes from the earliest Christian Fathers who saw our situation not as a judicial offense against God, but rather as a sickness needing to be cured. The idea of penal substitution found its life in the Roman West, and if you understand the mindset of the Roman Empire, you will understand that their culture influenced their understanding of God.

As for Scripture:

Mar 2:17

When Jesus heard this he said to them, "Those who are healthy don't need a physician, but those who are sick do. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Take time to ponder the whole verse. Jesus said that He had not come to call the righteous....which means that there were some who were righteous (contrary to Calvin's dour assessment of the human race). But they that are sick need a cure, a physician.

This is why the Early Fathers referred to the Eucharist as "the medicine of immortality."

 

[~Anastasia~]

It comes from the earliest Christian Fathers who saw our situation not as a judicial offense against God, but rather as a sickness needing to be cured. The idea of penal substitution found its life in the Roman West, and if you understand the mindset of the Roman Empire, you will understand that their culture influenced their understanding of God.

As for Scripture:

Mar 2:17

When Jesus heard this he said to them, "Those who are healthy don't need a physician, but those who are sick do. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Take time to ponder the whole verse. Jesus said that He had not come to call the righteous....which means that there were some who were righteous (contrary to Calvin's dour assessment of the human race). But they that are sick need a cure, a physician.

This is why the Early Fathers referred to the Eucharist as "the medicine of immortality."

Not only that, but every verse that speaks of salvation uses a form of the verb sozo ... which also means to heal. To be saved/to be healed were one thought in the early Church.

We can miss this in a translation.

 

[Light of the East]

You are gravely mistaken.

Really?

Then perhaps you could persuade the curia to publicly distance itself from some of the fantastic visions of your "seers" who describe God in such terms.

5 Saints Who Had Terrifying Visions of Hell | ChurchPOP

QUOTE: “[A]ll within it is, on the contrary, close, confused, and crowded; every object tends to fill the mind with sensations of pain and grief; the marks of the wrath and vengeance of God are visible everywhere; despair, like a vulture, gnaws every heart, and discord and misery reign around. […] In the city of Hell nothing is to be seen but dismal dungeons, dark caverns, frightful deserts, fetid swamps filled with every imaginable species of poisonous and disgusting reptile.

What father would do this to his child, even a most rebellious child? What father would not seek to use punishments to remediate the ill in the child?

Compare that website to this:

The River of Fire - Kalomiros - Glory to God for All Things

QUOTE: "But why do men hate God? They hate Him not only because their deeds are dark while God is light, but also because they consider Him as a menace, as an imminent and eternal danger, as an adversary in court, as an opponent at law, as a public prosecutor and an eternal persecutor. To them, God is no more the almighty physician who came to save them from illness and death, but rather a cruel judge and a vengeful inquisitor."

You see, the devil managed to make men believe that God does not really love us, that He really only loves Himself, and that He accepts us only if we behave as He wants us to behave; that He hates us if we do not behave as He ordered us to behave, and is offended by our insubordination to such a degree that we must pay for it by eternal tortures, created by Him for that purpose.

Who can love a torturer? Even those who try hard to save themselves from the wrath of God cannot really love Him. They love only themselves, trying to escape God’s vengeance and to achieve eternal bliss by managing to please this fearsome and extremely dangerous Creator.

Do you perceive the devil’s slander of our all loving, all kind, and absolutely good God? That is why in Greek the devil was given the name DIABOLOS, “the slanderer”.

All loving, all kind, and absolutely good God. That is not the picture that the Roman visionaries paint with the incredibly cruel tortures that they say are in the next life.

St. Isaac the Syrian said that the fires of hell are the scourging of God's love, not some vengeance put upon sinners so that God can get even and have His pound of flesh for our sins. It is His desire to cure, not to destroy.

I believed in the wrathful God for most of my life, and because of that, I lived in constant fear of hell and damnation for the slightest error. I was told by some that to have even one doctrine wrong meant eternal punishment. It is hard to feel comfortable or loved by such a deity who is so demanding and so not a father.

I wish to know God as loving Father....hence anything that describes Him in pagan terminology gets brushed off by me. I need to grow in His love, not cringe in fear of Him.

 

[Hillsage]

Walking by faith is one of the hardest things we do as Christians... I pray the sister be blessed for her faithfulness.

I agree. And, the wife and I are now talking about money to help her pay off some other bills mentioned, and we know she'll be struggling with.

When you mentioned taking a hard stand on sin, that is what I was referring to... I live by what 1 John 3:4 states...

1 John 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Breaking the 4th Commandment is sin just as breaking the 6th is sin.

We would agree up until the last line.

What is your understanding of the difference between "iniquity, transgression and sin"

 

[Hillsage]

It comes from the earliest Christian Fathers who saw our situation not as a judicial offense against God, but rather as a sickness needing to be cured. The idea of penal substitution found its life in the Roman West, and if you understand the mindset of the Roman Empire, you will understand that their culture influenced their understanding of God.

I guess I saw it as both eternally "judicial" requiring the death of Jesus, and as a temporal "sickness" which is one of the reasons we still get 'sick' today, because we haven't overcome ALL sin.

Jesus, speaking to an "ill" man, for 38 years...along with several others in the NT....said;

John 5:14 Afterward, Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, "See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse befall you."

As for Scripture:
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard this he said to them, "Those who are healthy don't need a physician, but those who are sick do. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
Take time to ponder the whole verse. Jesus said that He had not come to call the righteous....which means that there were some who were righteous (contrary to Calvin's dour assessment of the human race). But they that are sick need a cure, a physician.

I did ponder it for decades. And if "none were righteous" while the "the scribes/pharisees had a righteousness".....well Houston, I had a problem with that. Oh consistency/Holy Spirit, how do I make both these verses not contradict one another?

Romans 3:10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;

MAT 5:20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

I know scripture to be true, and men to be deluded, so I sought 'the truth' which was not taught by Calvin or orthodoxy. It works for me, and I believe it was 'revealed' by the Spirit. There are two types of righteousness in scripture IMO.

This is why the Early Fathers referred to the Eucharist as "the medicine of immortality."

But 'they' may have known the difference between "immortality" and "eternal life for this age" as the Spirit confirms to my understanding IMO, IMO.

ROM 2:7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;

But, as you well know I prefer more scholarly translations at times, and this is one of those.

Romans 2:7 to those, indeed, who in continuance of a good work, do seek glory, and honour, and incorruptibility - life age-during;

 

[Light of the East]

Breaking the 4th Commandment is sin just as breaking the 6th is sin.

But God has the right to change the manner in which we keep the 4th Commandment, just as He had the right to change circumcision to baptism. The New Covenant made a lot of changes as it fulfills the shadows of the Old Covenant.

BTW - regarding the keeping of the 4th Commandment, I am old enough to remember a time in this country when there were NO stores open on Sunday. And the Catholic Catechism still states that we should take it as a day of rest rather than of worldly chasing after money. You can thank greed Capitalism for destroying that idea.

 

[Light of the East]

Romans 3:10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;

Context, sir! What is St. Paul quoting?

Psalm 14

Of whom is David speaking when he says "There is none righteous"

Answer - the fool who does not believe in God. I.E. - the wicked.

You have to read things in context and refer back to what is being spoken of. You can't just jerk a verse out of context and build an entire theology around it. That's what Luther did - and he was wrong.

If you think that this is speaking of all mankind in our natural state (as Calvinism teaches) then it flies in the face of numerous verses which speak of people who are righteous.

 

[truefiction1]

"I answer Your call. Here I am" I desire nothing, from now , but Your holy Will, and Your divine Heart will be the altar of my immolation. Yes, it is in the furnace of love that I desire to see consumed all that remains of myself, in order that I may no longer be myself but You, O Jesus. Continue in this heart, which belongs to You, the tortures of Calvary, for as long as this new victim is not immolated, Your Sacrifice will be unfinished. Your work of redemption incomplete."

This could easily pass for a line recited by an actress portraying a female Roman Catholic saint in a "made for EWTN movie".

Actually, the more I pick it apart the more I can see that its not all that bad what's being said here. It's kind of good in ways. I guess its just not the kind of stuff I'm accustomed to hearing, the language being so prosaic and flowery and all.

 

[Hillsage]

Context, sir! What is St. Paul quoting?

MY POV was in context.

ROM 3:9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all; for I have already charged that all men, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin,
10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;

He is quoting the OT shadow and bringing it into the NT light of reality.

Psalm 14

Of whom is David speaking when he says "There is none righteous"

Answer - the fool who does not believe in God. I.E. - the wicked.

And 'in the context of Romans above' you're telling me that the Jews 'who did believe in God' were better off than the Greeks and not under the power of sin? That was not the context, of Romans or the gospel. Jesus was only sent to JEWS who believed in GOD and SINNERS.

MAT 15:24 He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

MAR 2:17 And when Jesus heard it, he said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners."

You have to read things in context and refer back to what is being spoken of. You can't just jerk a verse out of context and build an entire theology around it. That's what Luther did - and he was wrong.

And consistency would mandate that one can not 'jerk part of a post out of context' and not deal with the whole context of it, either.

If you think that this is speaking of all mankind in our natural state (as Calvinism teaches) then it flies in the face of numerous verses which speak of people who are righteous.

You are seeing what I saw long ago. If you go back and read my whole post again.....I said I dealt with that point.

And I told you I didn't agree with Calvin before and here's why SCRIPTURE;

ROM 2:14 When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them

IOW that 'totally depraved mind' of Calvin seems to be overruled by the 'heart' in the scripture above.

P.S. Maybe it would be better to get back to the question of the original post. I/we have strayed a bit.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I agree. And, the wife and I are now talking about money to help her pay off some other bills mentioned, and we know she'll be struggling with.


We would agree up until the last line.

What is your understanding of the difference between "iniquity, transgression and sin"

Semantics for disobedience to God. I gave the verse that clearly states what sin is...

Why is the last line so hard to comprehend? You do realize the Commandments were given as a whole and thereby follow all or follow none, right? Show me that Jesus abrogated the Sabbath... only He had the authority to change the day He was Lord of.... which He didn't.

Mark 2:28
Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

But God has the right to change the manner in which we keep the 4th Commandment, just as He had the right to change circumcision to baptism. The New Covenant made a lot of changes as it fulfills the shadows of the Old Covenant.

If God changed the manner in which we keep the 4th Commandment, please show us where He did that? You can't because He didn't....

The comparison to an ordinance being changed is not apples to apples. Now if you wanted to show me that another of the 10 Commandments was done away with proving the Sabbath could be as well, then please do. The Commandments, written on stone with God's own finger were permanent and kept inside the Ark... the ordinances you referred to with circumcision and such was written by Moses on parchment to show their temporary nature and stored outside the Ark. Why twist scripture so badly to prove something that is unprovable? God did not change the Sabbath to Sunday... there is zero evidence of this and we would do well to be obedient to the Fathers Commands... ALL of them.

 

[Hillsage]

Semantics for disobedience to God. I gave the verse that clearly states what sin is...

I agree it is Semantics, it is lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations. That's what I've done with the words of your post many years ago. That's why I was on board with you until the last sentence. So 'unpack' your 'Semantics' for me in light of the scripture you quoted;

1JO 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.


Scripture doesn't list them, all three, in many verses because they are as one 'theologian' told me, in defense of his ignorance as to a real answer; "We were taught in divinity school that they are 'a heaping of terms'." I had to explain to him that I live in farm country and once worked in a cattle feedlot...and I fully understood 'a heaping of things' better than he did, regarding his divinity school answer...IMO.

EXO 34:7 keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children, to the third and the fourth generation."

EZE 21:24 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have made your iniquity to be remembered, in that your transgressions are discovered, so that in all your doings your sins do appear;

I don't think the bible is resting on semantics for an understanding of these terms.

Why is the last line so hard to comprehend? You do realize the Commandments were given as a whole and thereby follow all or follow none, right? Show me that Jesus abrogated the Sabbath... only He had the authority to change the day He was Lord of.... which He didn't.

The last line wasn't hard for me to 'comprehend', but it appears to one you are having difficulty trying to 'defend'. But if I'm wrong, you can just clear it up in your next post, and explanation of those three terms from your POV.

 

[Benaiahian Monk]

Is the crucifiction of Christ a finished work?
Yes it is.
These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
John 17:1-4
Not all monks are secluded but dedicate there lives to a verse of scripture .
Pray without ceasing.
1 Thessalonians 5:17.