What We Believe

[ladodgers6]

Oh, just a simple question then.

LOL, sorry, it made me smile.

Matt can surely answer better than I can, but I want to watch the conversation, and I don't usually come in here.

Theosis is the process by which we become more and more like Christ - essentially we are being returned to the state which God intended for us from the beginning, healed of the effects of sin, which include the passions (perversions of good desires). That's sort of the nutshell answer, and like I said, I know Matt can explain much better than I can.

There is the statement often quoted by St. Athanasius - "God became man so that man might become god." But it is very important not to misunderstand this! We can become more and more like Christ - we are "in the image AND likeness of God" as it was in the beginning (except even more so - Adam had not attained maturity in Christ). But God - the uncreated, divine, Being - remains God, and we are and always will be creatures. We never cross any kind of border to "become God" in the same way that God is God.

It might also be good, if you've heard confusing answers, or those that contradict, to ask about them specifically. There can be a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation, but there can also be cases where we answer a question in a way that seems contradictory. The question may be "Is it a or b?" and our answer may be "yes." Sometimes it is not either/or, but rather it is both/and. But in order to know if that is what has happened, you'd have to give us the particulars.

I hope that helps a tiny bit. I'm guessing your question is really more than that. And I'm glad Matt caught the thread.

Welcome to TAW, by the way. We are glad to have you join us!

Thanks Anastasia for this informative piece, very insightful. Sorry I am a bit slow in understanding, because of my limited education. But I'll get it, like the little engine that could...lol.

Upon reading this more questions have popped up. In regards to Adam in the EOC teaching, who was he? Was he created in theosis? How did he fall? How are we infected by sin? How do sinners become theosis? Or if you could provide the direct source of this teaching so I can read it?

Thanks again for your time and have a great day! In love, not hate.

 

[ladodgers6]

More good questions.

I can answer less fully about Adam, but I will try.

Adam was created without sin, of course. All of the creation just described at that point was "very good". But there was a certain immaturity to Adam in the sense that He was not yet what God intended for him to become.

Thanks again Anastasia, for your time. I beg for your forgiveness in advance if I come across pompous, crass or offensive. I cannot understand, if I do not ask questions that I ponder upon. I am not here to debate, but to seek answers. So please understand my intent and I hope we can be friends, instead of enemies? I love discussing theology, its constantly on my mind. Anyway, if I may ask more questions here. If God created Adam upright and good; even in Theosis. How could He sin? These first comments sound to me as if Adam is under a Goal to meet. Can you expound further?

Was he in the process of theosis? I've never heard that question asked, so I don't know the technical answer. I would guess we can say yes? It makes sense, but better to ask someone who knows more.

Yea, no problem, whatever you can provide is more than welcome.

Your other question is a good one too ... I'm debating if it's one I should tackle.

Ok, I will say this. I am not sure where it's proper to draw actual lines for the terms. But the process has been discussed, and some Church a Fathers may break it down a little differently, and label it differently - I don't think that makes anyone "wrong" since overall the same process is described. I will give you what I know best, which I think is the most common description. Again, please ask if anything seems unclear or questionable, and I welcome correction or clarification from my Orthodox brothers and sisters.

There needs to be some restoration of communion with God. Typically we see this as being initiated or sealed with the sacrament of baptism. I think that is important to mention.

There is often a process of theosis described in terms of purification, illumination deification. These are not really discrete stages where a person is absolutely finished with one then moves absolutely into the next, never to return. Rather, the transitions involve some overlap.

One must first come to a knowledge of God. Becoming aware of Him, believing in Him, getting to know His commandments, and so on. One should read the Scriptures, listen to the teachings, spend time in His presence in worship and in prayer. (What I just said one should do - continues of course through all stages.)

Hope you do not mind if I interrupt here for a moment. Because I have more questions to better understand this. I do not understand why there has to be some restoration of communion with God, if there is no legal breach? And is there is no legal breach, then there is no punishment to be sanctioned. I got this from another East Orthodox about the Legal & Punishment not being a part of EOC. If so, then why did Christ have to be born under the Law, and kill sin in the flesh? Why do people have to believe if there is no legal ramifications or punishment for sin? These are the crucial parts I need to understand. Please forgive me if I came off, rude, disrespectful or pompous.

Purification involves effort on our part in cooperation with the help of God. The Church offers disciplines, and teaching to help. This I think is a huge stage for most of us. We purify our thoughts, our actions, our desires. We try to avoid sin, and we try to change those things in us that lead to sin. In the process, we are changed, and become more like Christ. This is not merely an effort on our part, but can be accomplished only with the help of God. But we are not passive.

When some degree of purity is attained, one begins to receive more illumination, more of the vision of God. One receives insights into creation, the work of God in all things. This effects further change in the person, making them even more like Christ, and helps cement those things attained by way of purification.

The final stage - deification - is not easy to speak of. I will probably say this in a clumsy way, but the Holy Spirit abides closely in a person at this stage. Sometimes we can describe such a person using some examples from the Saints, and how God has acted through them. I can't really say more.

I do not understand this?: When some degree of purity is attained, one begins to receive more illumination. Please expound if possible?

I see that I actually said much more than you were asking, in an effort to answer your question, and still failed to answer it.

I will take all the information I can get.

The best way to get on the path to theosis - well, since I determined that Orthodoxy was right and I wanted to become Orthodox, I was baptized and received into the Church. I go to Liturgy and receive communion. I keep my prayer rule, and have the benefit of a spiritual father who keeps me on track and recommends reading. I read the Scriptures. I watch my thoughts, actions, and feelings, and try to bring everything into alignment with God's commandments, and when I fail, I ask forgiveness and try again. I keep the fasts (except when medically prevented). I go to confession. Most of all, I try to treat everyone with the love of God, as far as I'm able.

Please understand that I'm not here to debate, but to seek questions. Where is Christ? Or the preaching of the Law & Gospel? I know that EOC does not hold to a legal aspect of the sinner. But why would any people need to believe in the EOC, when there is no threat of punishment because of sin? There are no sanctions applied to the sinner? In other words since there is no threat at all, why believe? I am just asking because this question is constantly on my brain.

Ah, I'm STILL saying too much. I don't want it to sound as though we think we "buy" or "merit" salvation through our works. We absolutely do not.

But we do our best to live a Christian life, and those efforts will change us. Believe it or not, not only our successes, but also our failures, since we learn humility and our absolute need for God's help in them.

That's really all it is - live a Christian life. Cooperate with God in a process that is absolutely His will for us, since He desires all to be saved.

This sounds like synergism. I read what you wrote, and I am grateful for your time, and information that you have provided. I can't state that enough, thanks. Something hits me as I read your comments here. No mention of sin, or the fallen nature, which brings condemnation and death. Or the preaching of the Gospel. I know this dummy is missing something, or I can't grasp it. Help me out here. What am I missing or can't comprehend?

But being Orthodox, I am grateful that the Church offers so much assistance and so many tools to help in this, as well as guidance based on many centuries of experience. So for that reason, I include all of the above in my answer.

I apologize this is so long. You ask questions that are both deep and simple at the same time. The best kind, I think.

Please do not apologize, you have friendly and courtesy, very kind, and thanks for that. Most of the time I get called nasty names or accused of being a devil, because I am a Calvinist. I hope we can become friends and continue our dialogue on this, because I love discussing theology. I am obsess with it.

Your Friend

Jesse

 

[Lord Kyrios]

Thanks. I just have to organize my notes and correspond them with notes I've already typed up and saved, and then put them in on here in somewhat order.

When you have Jesus, you have everything. This is why it is important to know who Jesus is. Did you know
Jesus Is called Kupios & God Is called Kupios In The Greek Bible. Every Title that applies to God, also applies to Jesus in the Greek.
Example: Jesus is Kupie, Kupiw, Kupiou and God is Kupie, Kupiw, Kupiou. Jesus is God Because His Father is God.
In other words, Your Son inherited your last name so why cannot Jesus be called by His Father's Name, GOD?

 

[~Anastasia~]

Hi Jesse,

Please don't worry about your tone - you are coming across just fine. And I'm glad you are asking more questions.

Sin is certainly a part of the problem - the cause of the problem. I didn't mention everything because there is really a lot to say, and necessarily I would leave things out. I may not always be able to hit the most important aspects, since I may focus too much on just part of your question, which is what I think I did.

Btw, I should say that the legal aspect is not completely absent from Orthodoxy in the sense that we deny it, even though it may sound like that sometimes. The problem is that the West has gone so far in that direction that in reaction and trying to restore a proper balance, I might overemphasize the other asoect(s).

The bigger emphasis is that sin brought the curse of death, and affected all of creation, like an infection. As a result, we all are surrounded by sin, are easily bent to it, and of course we all sin. Death and sin are the enemies. And since we understand sin the be like an infection, rather than in strictly legal terms, we understand that God wishes to heal us. In fact, the Greek sozo is used in different places, sometimes translated as save, sometimes as heal. But the fact that it's a single concept in the Greek is telling, imo.

Christ DID die for our sins, redeem us. But we consider the most important thing He accomplished through dying as God, and being resurrected, was to defeat death itself. This is also reflected in the Scriptures, and was strongly the emphasis of the early Church. And death must necessarily be defeated, because we were all born subject to that curse - even an innocent infant who dies without ever sinning and has no personal guilt or debt of sin.

That deserves much, more explanation, and I've only given a tiny counterpoint. If I can find it, there is a good explanation, I think it was given by Fr. Patrick Reardon, but it's been a while since I listened to it.

I know there are others of your questions I'm not getting to just yet - must go for a bit. Maybe someone else can jump in - most of the members here know this much better than I as well.

 

[ladodgers6]

I am glad I can bring a smile to your face.

I have been reading some data from their camp and I am getting mix answers to this thing "THEOSIS". Some say its the believer getting absorb into God's essence. Others say its the energies of God that they become. That we become like gods, sounds weird for me. And what is the differences between Theosis, Union with Christ and Sanctification? I will post what I found very interesting tomorrow on the subject of Theosis.

But thanks for your time and energy. All in Love, not hate.

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!

HERESY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As I mentioned to you, the reason it sounds weird is that if you read the Westminster Confession, you will find that from the very start in the Garden, man is spoken of in terms which present him not as son of God (Luke 3:38 - please look it up) but rather as simply a vassal slave put there to tend the Garden and be a good servant. Those are two very different mindsets.

And in reference to an earlier post you made.... I couldn't be mad at you. I have come to consider you as a good Internet friend and fellow seeker.

Thanks Ed, I am glad to hear that you are not mad. Because I am not here you be offensive, course, or rude. There is enough hate in this world. I think we can sit down and discuss theology without being mean to each other.

Yea, we too believe that Adam is the son of God. Meredith Kline makes much of this, in his Classical Covenant Theology. But the Scripture is also clear that Christ is both the Son and Servant. Here's some insight:

Is Jesus Christ the Son of God or the servant of God per Acts 3:26?
by Matt Slick

Jesus is called the son of God in many places in the New Testament (Matthew 27:54; Mark 1:1; John 1:49; 3:18; 2 Corinthians 1:19, etc.). But Jesus is also called the servant of God in Acts 3:26, "For you first, God raised up His Servant, and sent Him to bless you by turning every one of you from your wicked ways.” So how can Jesus be both the Son of God and the servant of God?

First of all, the term "son of God" when it is in reference to Jesus is a claim of equality with God. John 5:18 says that Jesus, "..was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God." Furthermore, Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, the word that was made flesh (John 1:1, 14).

Second, the term "servant" does not mean that Jesus, who is God in flesh (Col. 2:9), cannot serve the people whom God the Father sent him to redeem. Being a servant and being the "son of God" are different categories and are not mutually exclusive.

Jesus has two natures, both divine and human (Col. 2:9), was made under The Law (Gal. 4:4), and for a while was lower than the angels (Heb. 2:9). As such, under The Law he came to serve those who are lost by being an example to them and dying for them.

"just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many," (Matt. 20:28).

 

[ArmyMatt]

In regards to Adam in the EOC teaching, who was he?

the first man created by God.

Was he created in theosis?

he was created perfect, but he still needed to grow in God. before he was able, he messed up.

How did he fall?

touched the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, rebelled, sinned, and refused to repent when God confronted him.

How are we infected by sin?

Adam's sin gave man corruption, mortality, and an inclination to son.

How do sinners become theosis?

through God's grace in the sacramental life of His Church.

Or if you could provide the direct source of this teaching so I can read it?

check out St Gregory Palamas and his writings.

 

[ladodgers6]

Yes Anastasia gave some good material. I am looking for the specific teaching on it from the East word for word on it. And I would like also to know in the East teaching of Adam; who was he and was he create in Theosis before He sin? And how do people now get to this state of Theosis now?

I can give you my opinion (and trust me, that's all it is). Perhaps it will give you something good upon which to chew.

We are told in Scripture that faith is righteousness, correct? (Romans 10:6)

When I read that many years ago, thinking about the same thing you are asking here, it struck me that the whole of God's commands (law, if you please) was that they gave Adam a chance to express faith (belief, trust in) his Father. Faith is not assent to something. Faith actually does. Faith is a verb, according to James (I will show you my faith by my works).

My Dear Friend Ed, I came here to seek answers to my questions, not to debate. We have a private room that. But since you asked, I will not avoid what I believe and why I believe it. The Reformed position does not deny good works. Luther even emphatically stated its a living Faith, not a dead Faith. So we have to define what this Faith Righteousness is, correct? And Romans does provide this answer. Paul makes a contrast between a Righteousness that is obtain through Obedience of the Law of Moses, or through Faith in Christ. Here we have a antithesis between (Law) which demands perfect obedience to obtain perfect righteousness in the Law of Moses, and (Gospel) which a perfect righteousness is given in Christ, and receive through Faith apart from works of the Law.
But to better theme of this passage in Romans 10. I will quote the run of the passages:
1Brothers,a my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

The Message of Salvation to All

5For (Moses) writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them. 6(But; a contrast or opposed to the Law of Moses) the righteousness based on faith says, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) 7“or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); 9because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, (you will be saved.) 10For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and (is saved). 11For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

14How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard?c And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 16But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” 17So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

18But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for

“Their voice has gone out to all the earth,
and their words to the ends of the world.”

19But I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says,

“I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation;
with a foolish nation I will make you angry.”

20Then Isaiah is so bold as to say,

“I have been found by those who did not seek me;
I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.”

21But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.”

Therefore (and again, only my opinion) Adam was created neutral. Therefore, it would be impossible for him to enter into the divine love of God (which we are all invited to enjoy in eternity).

This is where I need more details on Adam's account according EOC. There is so many blank spaces to fill. First of all, why was Adam created neutral? Why not create him in Theosis from the beginning? What was Adam required to do to enter this divine love of God? Did God not love him from the beginning? And if so, what's the difference between that love and divine love? How did Adam fall? Why did Adam fall?

So the various commands (be fruitful, multiply, take dominion) were designed to help Adam grow in faith by actually doing them. So was the Temptation which came from the evil one. Imagine if you will, the growth in righteousness that Adam would have experienced if he had faced death from combat with the evil one to defend his bride (and this is exactly what Christ did for His Bride, the Church, on the Cross. He faced death and by death defeated death).

Okay I understand what you wrote. But where I am scratching my head because of my puny mind. If these commands did not carry legal actions for breaching them. Then how could Adam be held accountable for the sanctions of breaching these commands without legal ramifications? Correct me here if I got that wrong.
We also believe that God gave these commissions (be fruitful, multiply, rule) for Adam to follow. But specifically God command Adam 'Thou shalt' not to eat of the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil. "For in the day you eat thereof, you will surely die." Here is the sanction that if Adam breaks the legal commandment, legal judgement will follow it. So sin is a transgression or breaking of God's law, by doing the sinful act which breaches this legal commandments w/sanctions.
So these commands of God require obedience/ adherence/ fulfillment. But the difference in Adam in the Garden and us in postlapsarian is that Adam can meet this righteous standard that God demands through Perfect Obedience. And our condition of being under the curse of Law, because we are already condemned sinners. So there is a difference in contrast to Adam in prelapsarian (Pre-Fall), and us in the Postlapsarian (Post Fall). I am been accused of heresy a lot during my years as a convinced classical Calvinist. And people say that we distort God's word; "Alone" for example is no where found in Scripture, they tell me, so that's heresy. I respond by saying show me where the word "Trinity" is found in Scripture? There are concepts taught theologically, not name as such, like the Trinity. To dismiss it because the Word does appear is a person not seeking the truth; to me.

So there is this incredible link between Adam and the Last Adam in their actions. What the first Adam failed to do, the Last Adam did.

You state Adam lacked Faith. I would agree to a degree. But no where in Scripture is this found. But what is found in Scripture is the breach and disobedience of Adam, which is explicitly taught in Scripture. So what are we to believe. Here is the passages to which I speak of:
Romans 5
12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

Hosea 6:7
7But like Adam they transgressed the covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me.

The Classic Reformed position holds to Classic Covenant Theology this is the soil that surrounds the doctrines of Grace. This CT teaches the unfolding redemptive plan of God from Genesis through Revelation. Meredith Kline and Vos are great resources to get a understanding on the topic.

Why is Christ called the Last Adam. Why not just the Son of God? Why Last Adam? Why is there a comparison that Paul makes between them in Romans 5, and in 1 Cor. 15? I do not want to get long winded, though I have. I will share this in the next post.

Theosis (again, my opinion) is impossible outside of union with Christ. It is our union with Him that begins our journey. Peter says we have been made partakers of the nature of Christ. Is that the end? Once we have partaken, are we finished? Or is it the beginning of a fabulous never-ending journey into God's love, for really, theosis is simply the journey into the sharing of divine love. God is love, and love always wants to share itself with the object of its love. In our case, we are the object.

Inasmuch as I am not Orthodox .....please dear folks of this board.....correct anything I may have said wrong. I'm just a goofy Eastern Catholic who loves Holy Orthodoxy

The Reformed position holds Union with Christ. Which I will get into at other time. For now you bought up Romans 10. And in Romans 10 Paul talks about how a sinner is Justified before God. Through the Law or in the Gospel. And something you said, you even talk about something that Adam fail TO DO. And where Christ came to fulfill it. Just something to ponder upon.

Sorry for the long thread, but its hard to summarize it. As I said Ed, I came to this EOC area to learn from them, instead of getting it from a third party. I did not come here to debate. Please stop calling me a heretic. It's getting old. Why can't we just love each other and be kind, and learn from one another?

In Christ our Covenantal Savior and King

Your Friend Jesse.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Hello again,

I think these will take some time and discussion to get at. I see Matt answered all those questions I did not address about Adam, so unless you have further questions on those, I won't revisit your old post.

I just want to say that I think you misunderstand Theosis when you ask why God didn't create Adam in Theosis. The question just doesn't make sense. It's kind of asking why God didn't create Adam already in a perfected relationship with Himself, but that's a clumsy way of me restating it. Theosis is a process. Adam could have been, and I think probably was (others can correct me here if need be) in the process of Theosis, in some sense. He was communicating with God, developing and learning from his experiences. If he had never sinned, he would have gone on in unbroken progression, I imagine, and would have attained Theosis. I hope that makes sense. But essentially, God created Adam to enter into a relationship with Him, not at the summit of that relationship already. So as you see, the question doesn't quite make sense.

Another very important thing I want to point out from your post - and again I welcome correction - but our primary way of looking at God's warning "in the day you eat of it, you will surely die" was not the promise of punishment if Adam should transgress, but rather a warning of what the natural effect of sin would be. God is the source of Life. By disobedience, Adam separated himself from the source of life, and so made himself subject to death. He also died spiritually on that day.

Death was not God's punishment, but mankind rejecting life, in a sense, and all creation suffering along with him.

The west has developed a more punitive and legalistic understanding of matters than the east has always held. (Which again, it's not that it is completely absent, but it is a more minor point, and without the counterbalance God's very nature is understood differently - and I do fear Calvinism is on the opposite end of the spectrum in this regard.)

I hope that helps explain. And again, I do welcome correction. I have listened to a number of teachings on Adam and how all this relates, but it's a bit of a paradigm shift and I risk missing the nuances due to my own background.

Oh, that reminds me of one other thing. Regarding sin - and this may be more strongly emphasized because I attend a Greek-speaking Church, but sin (hamartia) is of course "missing the mark" in its intent - not "transgressing the law". Transgressing the law IS missing the mark, and is of course sin, but other things are sin as well - in fact, any falling short of the ideal. (And the ideal in our example is of course Christ, so any way in which we fall short of Christ is hamartia/sin. That understanding may help as well, to show that the punitive aspect is not so emphasized. God isn't looking to punish us severely every time we fall short of Christ's ideal. But rather He desires to heal us of those things that hinder us, and help us grow into the maturity that is represented in Christ.

I hope that helps also.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Actually, there was an article linked in response to a different question that explains all of this in much more detail - especially in sections 1, 2, and 3.

here's a good article on the matter: http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/christcross.aspx

ETA: it covers a broad understanding of the Atonement. What we do not see there is an angry God who is incapable of forgiving because He first needs a "pound of flesh" exacted from someone. This is the particular aspect we reject, for a number of reasons - not the least of which that sin is made God's problem and He is incomplete if He has a need, and limits His mercy if He is incapable of forgiving otherwise. Christ's death was sacrificial, and was necessary, but it didn't involve necessary satisfaction of a bloodthirsty need in God the Father (God forbid!).

 

[Light of the East]

My Dear Friend Ed, I came here to seek answers to my questions, not to debate.

I am sorry. I shall bow out and allow those here to respond to you. I will see you in our private chat.

All the best to you!

Ed

 

[Light of the East]

here is a question from our friend, Jesse.

I hope that someone here might attempt to answer it. I feel I do not have the proper understanding to approach this. I am also very interested in the answer regarding the "law." as such

QUOTE: Okay I understand what you wrote. But where I am scratching my head because of my puny mind. If these commands did not carry legal actions for breaching them. Then how could Adam be held accountable for the sanctions of breaching these commands without legal ramifications? Correct me here if I got that wrong.

 

[Light of the East]

Jesse ....

I'm a tad hurt this morning. I did not call you a "heretic." I responded to something that you posted from another source,

(Some say its the believer getting absorb into God's essence.)

therefore I am not calling you a heretic! That statement of shock was pointed to the person(s) whom you quoted and only them.

I hope you have come to realize since our first meeting that I am really working on this thing of being angry and calling names. It accomplishes nothing, is almost always done in pride (the exception would be our Lord in Matthew 23) and stunts my growth as a Christian. It is, in short, sin.

My apologies for the misunderstanding.

 

[ladodgers6]

Jesse ....

I'm a tad hurt this morning. I did not call you a "heretic." I responded to something that you posted from another source,

(Some say its the believer getting absorb into God's essence.)

therefore I am not calling you a heretic! That statement of shock was pointed to the person(s) whom you quoted and only them.

I hope you have come to realize since our first meeting that I am really working on this thing of being angry and calling names. It accomplishes nothing, is almost always done in pride (the exception would be our Lord in Matthew 23) and stunts my growth as a Christian. It is, in short, sin.

My apologies for the misunderstanding.

My dear friend, thanks for everything you done for me, in regards to insight and the knowledge you have shared. And for your support and kind words that you have shown me. I should have know better, especially in our private chats. I really like you, and consider you my brother no matter what. I know this is a serious topic, because it touches the very core of what we believe. I am the one who is sorry for thinking you called me names. As always its a pleasure to discuss theology with you. We all have our faults, and we can also lift each other up through love, not hate.

Ed, I know that my fellow Calvinists are crude, rude, disrespectful, to which I am embarrassed. And I do give them a lecture on their demeanor and attitude toward all people. Things can get heated in these, I understand this. But why can't we do it with class and respect in love.

No need for a apology, its just a misunderstanding, thanks for clearing that up. And yes I can't wait for our private chats. And by the way, I want you to participate in this thread, if you want. The more people the better, I will take all the information I can get.

Thanks dear friend,

In Christ

 

[mark46]

here is a question from our friend, Jesse.

I hope that someone here might attempt to answer it. I feel I do not have the proper understanding to approach this. I am also very interested in the answer regarding the "law." as such

QUOTE: Okay I understand what you wrote. But where I am scratching my head because of my puny mind. If these commands did not carry legal actions for breaching them. Then how could Adam be held accountable for the sanctions of breaching these commands without legal ramifications? Correct me here if I got that wrong.

I think that Anastasia posted a fine reference in post 189. I bookmarked it.

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

I'm not sure I understand what this thread is about... There is no link in the original post...

 

[~Anastasia~]

I'm not sure I understand what this thread is about... There is no link in the original post...

Dorothea uploaded teaching videos and her notes. The videos were later taken down, then later uploaded again. I had to look for the link. I'm not sure of their current status. I'm on my phone and what I do remember is that the files were HUGE so I don't dare access them from here. But here's the place I listened to them. (See link in quoted post below)

GOOD NEWS, all! A fellow member here has these lectures on video as well, and the videos that follow that called "The Inner Life of the Church" (for catechumens...the first one "What We Believe" is for inquirers).

Here's the link. Thanks for angelsbooklove for uploading all of them and in one place for me! The 12-part series "What We believe" is at the bottom...you need to scroll down to get to them. I will be watching the next set since I haven't seen that one yet!

ADrive | Online Storage, Online Backup, Cloud Storage

It would be great if we could get the link posted on page 1. I think this post came from around page 7. I knew it was somewhere so I went looking for it.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Oh, oops - the account isn't active anymore.

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Dorothea uploaded teaching videos and her notes. The videos were later taken down, then later uploaded again. I had to look for the link. I'm not sure of their current status. I'm on my phone and what I do remember is that the files were HUGE so I don't dare access them from here. But here's the place I listened to them. (See link in quoted post below)




It would be great if we could get the link posted on page 1. I think this post came from around page 7. I knew it was somewhere so I went looking for it.

Thank you, but when I click the link you quoted it takes me to a page displaying this message:

"The public file you are trying to download is associated with a non-valid account.

Please contact the owner for further assistance."

 

[~Anastasia~]

Ok here is a link to a you-tube video of the first "What We Believe" video, which I think is connected to the notes in this thread, and the other videos in the series are available on the same channel.

I see it posted the video. If the link itself is needed, here it is:
http: //youtu.be/DT5PUB5ZiqI
(remove the space after http: that I had to insert to make the link itself show)

And here is "The Inner Life of the Church" series - which I think is the more in depth one.

The Inner Life of the Church


I hope this helps!

 

[ladodgers6]

Thank you - all of you - as I work through my Western mindset of "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God."

Matt, when I read this:



I thought immediately of "demand." I mean, what is sacrifice but a payment to a demand for justice?

And the Scriptures are filled with verses which speak of God's anger and wrath. So it is not as easy as thought to just put this aside and see God as a Being without wrath when the Scriptures speak of it. Sacrifice, in the Western mindset, speaks of appeasing that wrath and cooling down the anger.

Look forward to your answer on this. I am learning.

This Ed, are great question to inquire about.