|
Hiro Protagonist posted:How do people in this thread deal with the constructed nature of Christianity? So much of what Christians take for granted theologically is the result of centuries of discussion and argument from people who based their thoughts on their assumptions. But more broadly, I can look at St. Irenaeus, St. Basil, or St. John Damascene and recognize the same faith as St. Porphyrios, St. Silouan, or St. Maria of Paris. This is part of why I no longer take Elaine Pagels seriously (since she came up earlier); in her book on Revelation, she portrays St. Anthony of Egypt as some kind of crypto-Gnostic based on his letters, when if anything, nothing he says would be out of place in the entirely Orthodox Philokalia. And the ascetic practices of the Orthodox Church, the beliefs about prayer, sin, and theosis, and the overall framework of salvation quite simply make sense to me as a framework for Christian belief. Plus I am reasonably convinced that the Virgin Mary has answered a few of my prayers. Nothing earth-shattering, but still meaningful to me.
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2021 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
Josef bugman posted:What is the latter based on? My knowledge on Jesus' life is just the highlights really (curing people, Lazarus, etc) but the whole idea of "render unto Caeser what is Caesers" doesn't seem to be based around an immediate apocalyptic vision per say. And even if the end didn't come within the Apostles' lifetime, this is still important for Christians, especially Catholics and Orthodox. Every Mass or Divine Liturgy is considered to be a visit to the Kingdom of God. In the Divine Liturgy, we even have a few temporal paradoxes--commemorating the Second Coming as if it's already happened. We're still called to live as if our kingdom is not of this world; I think that's part of the purpose behind our asceticism. Whether it's preparing for death or the second coming, we're going to a place where food, sex, anger, and money simply aren't going to matter anymore, so fast, be chaste, give freely, and forgive.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 17:08
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:How much of this was contemporaneous with Christ himself? I don't remember where I read it but some people argued that his life was more moulded to fit the Messiah ideal post death, rather than something done by Christ himself during his lifetime. In one sense you're right, because one thing the Gospels do agree on is how enigmatic he was before his death. Even the Apostles who told him "You are the Messiah" didn't understand what was really going on until his resurrection. Of course, the difference is that "post death" doesn't mean much if he did rise from the dead, in which case Christ himself would be the one putting his life into perspective. The other thing is that in a lot of ways Jesus doesn't fulfill the role of Messiah as expected by Jews at that time. They expected a fully human David-like leader who would take charge of Israel, drive out the Romans, and establish a new kingdom in Israel. The Virgin Birth, death and resurrection, and divine Sonship don't enter into it at all, even in modern Judaism. For the Apostles and the Church, Jesus completely reinvented the concept of the Messiah, and of God himself, and so the Apostles and the Church reinterpreted the Hebrew Scriptures in light of Jesus, and wrote the New Testament in light of that new understanding. Josef bugman posted:And how do Christians square this point of view with the lack of apocalypse?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 21:13
|
|
|
Nessus posted:You probably could sell a lot of copies of a book with something like "God: the Ultimate Police Commissioner" though. You might have to get a ghost-writer to include bible citations... But as far as trial metaphors go, it's worth remembering that forgiveness and permission are not the same thing. Forgiveness means you acknowledge what happened, but are willing to let it go. It does not mean you approve of it. This is something that infests every argument about the death penalty. "I don't think x deserves to die." "But he killed 6 people." "I know, but killing him would be wrong." "But he killed 6 people." "I'm not saying that wasn't wrong, just that this is also wrong." "But--" I would also say that there's also a big difference between self-punishment and humility, the latter of which is a virtue. It's also worth remembering that one of the literal meanings of the word "Satan" is "Accuser." Satan is basically a corrupt, hyperzealous prosecutor.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 01:29
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:To be fair, I think "dedicating [one's] life to being poor and annoying" is a pretty good description of a lot of religious orders!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2021 03:33
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:edit: the historical background of the Hutterites and others on the northern Plains is they're largely Germans from Russia. Catherine the Great (German herself) invited German settlers to farm the Volga region with guarantees they wouldn't be conscripted into the army and would have freedom of religion. Quite a few Anabaptist groups took that offer, they were often not welcome in much of Europe because they refused to serve in the military or pay taxes that would fund the military. The exemption from conscription and freedom of religion didn't last and most of them emigrated starting in the 1860s. Many settled in the northern Plains because they were experienced in dryland agriculture and familiar with steppe climates. German Russians have a reputation for being more conservative/traditional than other German immigrant groups.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
One thing that tweaks the standard interpretation of the Fall is theosis. If the goal of the Christian life is to be deified by grace, then of course there's nothing necessarily wrong with Adam's desire to become Godlike. That's what Jesus tells us to do! The issue is wanting some other source for divinity besides God.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2021 07:37
|
|
|
Fair warning: Bruenig auto-deletes all her tweets, so here are some screenshots so this discussion still makes sense in the future:    I already replied in the comments yesterday, but my thoughts are basically thus: 1) Forgiveness isn't necessarily earned; you can be proactive in forgiving people. Jesus didn't wait for anyone to repent before he forgave his executioners. You can also pray for their repentance. Repentance is still essential, but more in the sense that without repentance, they can't benefit from forgiveness. God can forgive me--and I believe he always preemptively forgives everyone--but if I don't turn my life around, it'll be like if he never forgave me at all. 2) Forgiveness does not necessarily mean you have to trust the person, or continue to give them your time. It's perfectly fine to cut yourself off from toxic people, or bad influences. My mind often turns to this comment from Fr. Stephen Freeman's blog (specifically, from this post).  3) The holiest saints lived as if everyone else deserved to go to heaven except themselves, and prayed for others based on that. There's a story about St. Silouan, who, hearing a hermit gloat about the idea of atheists burning in hell, asked the hermit how he'd feel if he could see that from heaven. When the hermit said he'd feel fine, Silouan said, "Love cannot bear that; we must pray for all."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2021 18:03
|
|
|
I believe the one on the right is supposed to be Gabriel. I found a more modern one on Google with Gabriel wearing the exact same outfit. He's supposed to be holding a disk, and his name would be over his shoulder, but that's been eroded away. As for what it's for, I think it's specifically for their shared feast day: the Synaxis of the Holy Archangels.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
Bourricot posted:I self-identify as a Reformed Protestant, but more due to heritage/cultural inertia than theological grounds (to be honest, I often struggle with some parts of Reformed theology).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2021 22:58
|
|
|
Also, the Orthodox likes boat metaphors as well--the Church is the new Noah's Ark, Christ is the captain, who helps the Saints with steering, and the canons are the Rudder.Slimy Hog posted:My understanding of the Orthodox view is similar to this: we are constantly working out our salvation in cooperation with the holy spirit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:first read this as "cannons" and was trying to figure out what Orthoboat is shooting at, maybe demons or something??
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2021 01:07
|
|
|
Theologically, there's no difference. The style of worship varies a bit between Greek and Slavic, but it's still the same basic liturgy. The main difference is just which bishops that parish is connected with. The Greek Archdiocese is under the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Antioch is under Antioch. ROCOR is under Moscow. OCA is autocephalous (self-governing), though originally under Moscow. At present, Moscow is out of communion with Constantinople, and I think that carries over to ROCOR, but I'm pretty sure it's just them. It shouldn't matter too much which jurisdiction you go with. In the end, I figure the community at that parish, including the priest, should be the deciding factor. Beyond that, ROCOR tends to be the most rigorous. IIRC, you have to go to confession *every* time you expect to take Communion. In the OCA it's required only once a month, and in the Greek Church it's between you and your priest. Greek churches are probably going to be the most likely to use the original language, though every one I've been to has been convert-heavy and uses plenty of English. In an ideal world, there would just be one American Orthodox Church, because under the canons bishops aren't supposed to have overlapping territories, but this is what we have. quote:Greek churches are more likely to have Keromaru5 fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Mar 5, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2021 01:56
|
|
|
Thirteen Orphans posted:I can’t believe I don’t know/remember this: do the Orthodox have a concept of “worthiness” for the Eucharist? To put it another way, do the Orthodox recognize certain sins that makes one ineligible to take Eucharist until they confess them? I've seen advice that it's generally a bad idea to excommunicate yourself from the Eucharist. That said, while I'm not 100% positive what they are, certain grave sins do seem to require confession before receiving Communion. I have one book on Confession that quotes a Father as pointing to Murder, Adultery, and Idolatry as the big three. He connects them to the ruling of the Council of Jerusalem in Acts, where Christians are forbidden from food consecrated to idols (idolatry), adultery/fornication, and blood (murder). These tend to get the strictest penalties in the canons as well (though again, one should not be their own canon lawyer). Some people also abstain when they have an ongoing conflict with somebody. Also, breaking the Eucharistic fast without good reason. That's as much as I'm aware of.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2021 03:12
|
|
|
1: Who created humanity? a) The one God of the Israelites. b) Prometheus. c) Some demiurgic idiot. d) Aliens. 2: How many gods are there? a) One b) Three c) A whole bunch d) both a and b e) both a and c f) all of the above 3: Who was Jesus? a) liar b) madman c) The organizer of Woodstock d) Donald Trump's protege e) The Son of God 4) Was Jesus divine or human? a) Human b) Divine c) Yes
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2021 22:46
|
|
|
St. Nikolai Velimirovich takes a similar approach to enemies in his prayer.quote:Enemies have driven me into your embrace more than friends have. There's also the novel Laurus, which includes a sequence in which the main character, a Russian Orthodox fool-for-Christ, goes on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem with an Italian who can see the future. Along the way, they join up with a Franciscan monk who expresses gratitude for the donkey his fellow monks gave him to ride. It's so ornery and stubborn that he figures it can only be for his spiritual benefit to put up with it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2021 06:09
|
|
|
Pershing posted:My read of it is Paul not out and out saying that speaking in tounges is bad/sinful/etc. but he sounds deeply uncomfortable with the practice. He definitely holds prophecy to be the better utterance from the Spirit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
Nessus posted:This seems to be trying to manipulate God, but I am having a hard time narrowing down exactly why. I can see why having some kind of objective or semi-objective feat that you can connect back to your faith giving you strength would be validating, both for you and as a missionary tool, but putting a snake in the mix seems like a bad call. I could imagine St. Seraphim of Sarov picking up a venomous snake and handling it and even chatting with it like an old friend. The man befriended a bear, so why not? But I myself am not as holy as St. Seraphim of Sarov. And he almost certainly would not have done it just to prove how holy he is.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2021 22:08
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:Beyond the obvious issues with putting the Lord your God to the test, your predecessor (who literally did pre-decease you!) obviously trusted the Lord's promises, because he handled snakes (right up until his faith failed him or whatever), right? Are you not For some reason, I'm now imagining a snake-handling version of Biff Tannen saying, "What's the matter, McFly? Chicken?!"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2021 03:32
|
|
|
Ya got me. Like, the Church does exalt chastity and celibacy, but the only references to semen I'm familiar with are a few canon laws on wet dreams, and those sections of St. John Cassian's Institutes and Conferences where the monks talk about wet dreams. IIRC, the canon is basically "Not the biggest deal in the world," and I'm not sure what the monks had to say, because the most easily accessible public-domain translation left those parts out, I guess so as not to scandalize late 19th-early 20th-c. sensibilities. But it might be safe to assume that their take was also "Not the biggest deal in the world." I think St. Athanasius even compared it to a sneeze.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2021 22:54
|
|
|
I guess the main question I have is: what are these instances of "We" like in Arabic?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2021 03:57
|
|
|
Aληθώς ανέστη!
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2021 16:07
|
|
|
Archbishop Damaskinos of Athens was regent of Greece for a couple years. He's the one who had previously basically dared the Nazis to execute him. Also, Bishop Makarios served three terms as the first president of Cyprus.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
The second one.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2021 08:11
|
|
|
In Orthodoxy, the fires of hell is generally understood as the same fire of God's love that illuminates and deifies the saints. It's a fire that burns away sin, so if sin is all one has, if one is still attached to their passions even after death, then the fire is going to torment rather than glorify. St. Isaac the Syrian describes it as everlasting remorse, like being with someone you know you've wronged. Fortunately, hell--that is, gehenna--technically doesn't exist yet, but is a state that will only come about with the Last Judgment. Until then, sinners go to Hades, where the torment is more the anticipation of future punishment than of one being carried out right now. And since the Last Judgment hasn't happened yet, the eternal destiny of these souls hasn't been settled yet. So it's entirely possible and even promoted in the Church to pray for the dead, do good deeds on their behalf, and commemorate them at the Liturgy, even those who might be in hell (as we do on Pentecost during Kneeling Vespers). And according to Tradition, it really does help. St. Macarius once spoke to a skull who described his torment as being in total darkness and isolation, and when people pray for the dead, they can begin to see each other. St. Gregory the Great is said to have prayed the emperor Trajan out of hell. And St. Xenia became a fool-for-Christ for the sake of her deceased husband. St. Mark of Ephesus taught that it will definitely be temporary for some people; that they'll be purified by their time in Hades, or by the prayers of the living, or even by the experience of death. There's also the question of whether the future punishment will be everlasting or temporary. A lot of it depends on how you understand the use of "eternal punishment" in Matthew 25. Origen understood it to refer to the source of the fire (that is, God), but not the duration (there's a separate Greek word that definitely refers to duration, but it's not the one used). After the 5th Ecumenical Council, the standard teaching of the Church is that it is the duration. I personally take a paradoxical view: both universalism and (for lack of a better term) infernalism are true. The punishment will be temporary and corrective, like an emergency surgery. But since our relationship with time will presumably be different, the past won't necessarily be past anymore; it'll still be part of the one punished. Like how one tends to keep the scars after a surgery, or how the effects of an amputation never really go away. And until then, I can still pray that they'll be saved. As for experiencing hell in this life, that happened to St. Silouan the Athonite, as he was preparing to join the monastery. His ultimate lesson was "Keep your mind in hell, and don't despair."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2021 18:08
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:I wonder why chastity became a virtue. It's unknown to many civilizations and while I'm no great lover of sex, I cannot fathom why an all-powerful God cares where you stick your penis. So there must be something in the culture around the Abrahamic faiths that led to this odd belief. Plus I'm pretty sure chastity is a thing in Vedic cultures as well. "Right action" is part of the Noble Eightfold Path in Buddhism, and that includes proper sexual conduct, which is basically the same as it is for Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Keromaru5 fucked around with this message at 03:23 on Aug 1, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2021 03:21
|
|
|
Also, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" is a direct quote from one of the Psalms. It's not simply an outpouring of grief, it's a prayer from his liturgical tradition.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2021 16:33
|
|
|
Yeah, I never noticed it until I was Episcopalian. I think in Catholicism and Orthodoxy, it's traditionally supposed to be a priest who says that part, though I've seen it in some prayer books for laypeople. In Orthodoxy it's modified to "For Thine is the Kingdom and the power and the glory, of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and forever and to the ages of ages."docbeard posted:There are a whole bunch of minor variants that are really funny when you get a bunch of Christians who were raised in different places/from different denominations together and go SURELY WE ALL HAVE THIS IN COMMON.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
In Orthodoxy, there's even a term for thinking you're closer to God than you actually are: "prelest." Turns up all the time in the Philokalia. If you hear a voice or see a vision, it's perfectly reasonable to ask "Are you sure you're God?" That said, I've gotten good results from asking the Virgin Mary for help.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2021 02:35
|
|
|
But still, original sin does take different forms depending on which tradition you're dealing with. A lot of these negative views of children seem bound up in Total Depravity, which is why people brought up Calvinism. With Catholicism, Original Sin is washed away with baptism, which of course is not long after one is born. Orthodoxy also practices infant baptism, but views original sin as more ontological, with no implied guilt. Neither one as far as I know holds a child fully responsible for sin until later in childhood. Plus the Romantic poets come from an Anglican milieu, which traditionally avoided the extremes of Reformed theology, whereas the entire purpose of the Puritans was to oppose the more Catholic aspects of Anglicanism. Are there any passages about childhood among non-Protestants?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2021 22:39
|
|
|
Fair_Winds posted:I have a statement that is a precursor to a question, Please bare with me. I recently have entered into a new stage of life and one of the problems facing me whilst all my friends are out self-actualizing, is the topic of religion. I grew up in a household that was never more than casually religious, my father was a die hard atheist and my mother belongs to a heavily baptist family. I don't belong to either, my father insisted I not have religion forced upon me and even bought me a bible when i was younger as a gift and explained that if I wished to read it and follow it I was allowed to. The question of religion was just left to me. Now that I am a fully grown adult, it feels like a church or at least religion should be a part of my life. Spirituality is a big part of many people's lives. How does one figure out what part of Christianity they should follow? What questions do I need to ask myself to figure this out? Is there some sort of specialist out there that does nothing but plugs people into the right church or belief? Any help is appreciated. If you were to really boil it down, my main question was which one made/makes the most sense of the Gospel.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2021 04:58
|
|
|
Yeah, I quit porn over five years ago, right before I became Orthodox. Partly I got sick of having this aspect of my life that felt out of my control; sick of the assumptions and ideology baked into it, and never being quite sure how ethical any of it was, or could ever be; and the feeling that it was holding me back in various respects. One thing that helped me was keeping the right mindset: focusing on what I had to gain from quitting. This is also what helped me get my mind around fasting. It's not necessarily a limitation, it's an opportunity. The other thing was treating it as a distraction, and using prayer to redirect my attention when I'm tempted. In particular, this prayer, from the Ancient Faith Prayer Book: "O Lord Jesus Christ, Sovereign Master, help me and do not let me sin against you. Incline not my heart to words and thoughts of evil, but deliver me from all temptation." Followed by three Jesus Prayers ("Lord Jesus Christ, Son if God, have mercy on me, a sinner")
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2021 01:10
|
|
|
My priest has talked about how some teenage girls in our congregation get made fun of by their friends for dressing more modestly, even if only on Sundays. One thing that's become clear to me about modesty is, it's not necessarily about protecting the opposite sex from temptation. Men wouldn't have come up with nun fetishes if that were the case. Rather, modesty is about not showing off. Of course we're not supposed to make ourselves an object to be lusted after, but someone covered from head to toe in garish, attention-grabbing clothes is in a way just as immodest as someone who shows up to church in a Vampirella costume. Captain von Trapp posted:In our culture, thinking porn is bad is weird at best.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2021 03:15
|
|
|
So one thing I had in mind in my post earlier was a thread on an Orthodox forum where one guy was accusing Orthodox women of being immodest because, even if they make an effort to be modest, they'll still wear high sleeves and low collars and such, and become a temptation to him. He was comparing them unfavorably to Muslim and Mennonite women. The entire rest of the thread is the women on the forum shooting him down, explaining that they don't dress the way they do for people like him, making similar points to what everyone else here is saying (hence also my comment about fetishizing nuns--again, sex makes people weird). I wish I could find it--it may have gotten deleted.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
I've always wanted to rewrite a Chick Tract into weird Orthobro nonsense, but I've never been quite bored enough to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2021 05:38
|
|
|
BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:???????
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2021 05:31
|
|
|
I think where people are stuck is that there's someone off to the side holding little rods that the crowns are hanging from, so it looks like they're floating.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
It's a pre-Christian (as in, pre-the existence of Christianity) custom popular in the Greek world. Originally it was mostly just for royalty like the Byzantine emperors, but over time, as the Church gained more authority over marriage customs, crowning spread to all Orthodox faithful, with the meanings described above. At first, most weddings were civil/social ceremonies, even well after Constantine, but Christians could still get a blessing from a priest if they wanted, usually during the Liturgy. Eventually weddings became their own ceremony, which is how things stand today. Here's Fr. John Meyendorff on how marriage developed in Eastern Christianity. Also, IIRC, there are no vows. Also also, Byzantine emperors tended to choose their wives sort of like The Bachelor. Keromaru5 fucked around with this message at 03:20 on Oct 2, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2021 03:11
|
|
|
My assumption is that even if you're in a different state and passing from glory to glory, your personality is still in continuity with who you were when alive. If nothing else, I've never gotten the idea that St Basil or St Nicholas or the Mother of God are all that different in heaven from how they were on Earth. If anything, they may even be more like themselves. EDIT: "passing," not "losing." I hate phone posting. Keromaru5 fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Oct 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2021 02:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
Notahippie posted:It really seems like a pre-Christian story that was Christianized or otherwise a call back to pre-Christian beliefs because of that angle. But I think the Christian version leans into the idea that Satan or evil spirits were working against the church, and it was Oran's self-sacrifice for his faith that vanquished them. So less a question of a demand by God and more a martyrdom to conquer evil. Having said that, I don't think that Oran's story is seen as a mainstream or accepted story in the Irish church, I think it's more a local legend or side story attached to the story of St. Columba. My comment above was more a reflection on the idea that there is something of potential spiritual value in the story after all, when I had always seen it just as a ghost story with a church attached to it. There's actually a similar story about John the Apostle/Evangelist/Theologian/Revelator: OrthodoxWiki posted:"Account of the miracle that occurred at his grave: When over 100 years old, St. John took seven disciples outside of Ephesus and had them dig a grave in the shape of a cross. St. John then went into the grave, and the disciples buried him there, alive. Later on, when his grave was opened, St. John's body was not there. 'On May 8 of each year, dust rises up from his grave, by which the sick are healed of various diseases.'"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2021 22:51
|
|