Evangelical Apologist Hank Hanegraaff Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy

religiousresearcher.org ^ | 4-10-2017 | Rob Bowman

[fishtank]

Evangelical Apologist Hank Hanegraaff Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy

Posted by: Rob Bowman

On Palm Sunday, April 9, 2017, Hank Hanegraaff formally joined the Orthodox Church. Since 1989 Hanegraaff has been the President of the Christian Research Institute (CRI) and (since ca. 1992) the host of CRI’s Bible Answer Man radio program.[1] Hank, his wife Kathy, and two of their twelve children were inducted by a sacramental rite called chrismation into the Orthodox faith at St. Nektarios Greek Orthodox Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, near where CRI is based. In chrismation, a baptized individual is anointed with oil in order to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.[2]

[af_vet_1981]

They knew that their Master hated the priests who were determined to kill Him! Though he permitted priests to influence the government to pin him to the Cross, His death showed how dastardly that kind of pernicious parasites the priesthood of Jewry was.

The LORD Himself established the priesthood of Jewry, from the tribe of Levi, so your polemic is in error. The scripture says that a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. Even when a priest was not obedient to the faith, the scripture shows the office was to be respected.

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The Lord our righteousness. For thus saith the Lord; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually. And the word of the Lord came unto Jeremiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season; Then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers. As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me. Moreover the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying, Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying, The two families which the Lord hath chosen, he hath even cast them off? thus they have despised my people, that they should be no more a nation before them. Thus saith the Lord; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; Then will I cast away the seed of Jacob and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them.


And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.


And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day. And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth. Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law? And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God's high priest? Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.

Jeremiah, Catholic chapter thirty three, Protestant verses fourteen to twenty six,
Acts, Catholic chapter six, Protestant verse seven,
Acts, Catholic chapter twenty three, Protestant verses one to five,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[af_vet_1981]

There is not one clue in any of these citations from which you can build a doctrine ...

That is the point; I do not need to build a doctrine. I am not a Protestant, Reconstructionist, or Restorationist. I am not re-forming a religion according to my own understanding. I have not constructed a theology that is based an antiCatholic premise. I believe in one holy catholic apostolic church.

[imardmd1]

I did not equate them.

Don't tell me you were not trying. Nor did I say there was a Nicolaus in the the Ephesus or Pergamos synagogueic gatherings. That original question was rhetorical in nature, so you can let that rest for a while.

It is true that there were nicolaitan priestmakes in Pergamos by John's last years, and Jesus wanted them flushed out. They persistently wanted to bring the Jewish priest system to Gentile churches. They finally began to get a foothold in Antioch, when Simon Peter was there. Apoparently he was not moved to stamp them out, but encouraged them, for which he was disciplined, but not thoroughly enough. Circular argument not borne out by the scriptures or tradition

Don't accuse me of circular argumentation when you stand up to your chin in it for your hypotheses.

Deacons are not a class of priests. The scriptural type/analogy/model would be more like:
Israel => Levites => Cohenim (Priests)
with the deacons being more like Levites to assist the priests

Aside from this inaccuracy (Jewish priests by the law are descendants of Aaron, not merely Levites), but that has no meaning because the Jerusalem had no priestly government, and the Jewish system is dead, gone, as far as real Christ followers are concerned. The Apostles were not priests. And that is the point I am making. They were commissioned and engaged to enlist disciples and make every one a disciple-maker just like themselves--no more, and no less.

[af_vet_1981]

Don't tell me you were not trying. Nor did I say there was a Nicolaus in the the Ephesus ...

I was not trying to equate them. I was summarizing what the scripture said. Both of those heresies were present at Pergamos and condemned.

However, you did write this in post 709, asking what Nicolaus was doing (in) Ephesus. Neither I nor the scriptures mentioned him or those who held his doctrine being in Ephesus as an apparent rhetorical question. It seems to me like a very obvious error, and should read Pergamos instead of Ephesus in your post.

4/21/2017, 7:36:06 PM · 709 of 783
imardmd1 to af_vet_1981
"So what is this presumed Nicolaus doing at Ephesus, anyway? Duh."

[af_vet_1981]

Aside from this inaccuracy (Jewish priests by the law are descendants of Aaron, not merely Levites)

What inaccuracy ? I did not write what you wrote.
I wrote Cohenim (Priests).
I wrote that there was a model where:
Israel => Levites => Priests.
Priests belong the tribe of Levi.
The tribe of Levi belongs to Israel.

Using that type,paradigm or model for Catholics, Catholic deacons would be more like Levites than Cohenim (priests) because Catholic deacons assist Catholic priests in some similarity to how Levites assisted the Cohenim (priests).

[editor-surveyor]

.
Another scripture twisting idiotic comment by the master.

[imardmd1]

However, you did write this in post 709, asking what Nicolaus was doing (in) Ephesus.

I guess you needed some kind of tag on it to see that it was a rhetorical question (not needing or wanting an answer) put there to show just how ridiculous it was for anyone to think there would be some kind of hedonist trying to break the Ephesus defense circle. But in truth, the attempt to emplace Judaists within Christian fellowships was going on, and one of their strategies was to convince a few people that they needed some kind of mediator between them and The Christ--and that would be a nicolaitan priest. And actually also, they are pretty big today, eh?

But like the man with wooly white hair, flashing eyes, and hot feet, I hate nicolaitanism too, whichever flavor you choose.

Glad for the help in making my point(s).

[editor-surveyor]

.
IOW more Idios ipsalusos?

The words are sufficiently plain to be beyond any of that.

You argue with Peter, you argue with John.
.

[imardmd1]

Jesus is my Eternal High Priest, and He is of the tribe of Judah. There is no room for Levitical priests on his staff today.

Let's not get away from the central point. There arer no Jewish-type priests in true Christian gatherings, and never were. Gentile Deacons are not Levites. All the Jerusalem deacons were Greeks, and for a purpose. They were not ministering to the Apostles; the Apostles could find their own way to the table. The deacons were of and ministering to, on their own recognizance, the Hellenic Jews yet in Jerusalem who stayed after their trip to Israel for the Pentecostal feast to follow the Lord, and were without subsistence, AFIK.

In the Gentile Christian churches, the deacons occupied the same post: to see as to the widows and poor, and probably later on, the physical assembly hall plant, as today. Of course, they were not priests in a special role, because there are none in a true Christian assembly. All Christians are priests. All Christians can, with a godly boldness, enter the Heavenly Holy of Holies in prayer and fellowship with the Heavenly Father and His Son. They need no assistance from a mediator other than Jesus for this.

[imardmd1]

Thanks for your compliment. I'll save it and frame it. How does it feel to relieve yourself?

[imardmd1]

The LORD Himself established the priesthood of Jewry, . . .

And look how they treated Him, from Aaron and his golden calves, to Caiphas and his prophecy.

. . . from the tribe of Levi, so your polemic is in error.

How so? Moses and Aaron were brothers, Levites, but only Aaron and his descendants were appointed priests. Not every Levite was a prist. Where was I wrong? (rhetorucal)

The scripture says that a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. Even when a priest was not obedient to the faith, the scripture shows the office was to be respected.

Yes, but this proves nothing, except that they were not priests in or of the Churches of Christ. Sacrifices in the Temple had to stop, because the curtain was rent in two, thus destroying the ritual. And no man desiring to be a member of Christ's Church could also be a participant in a system fulfilled and put to death on the Cross. Nicodemus certainly was no longer a member of the Sanhedrin (although he was not a priest; he was a teacher of the Law).

And today, I respect a man for his virtue, but I do not respect the office in a religion that has a different gospel, one that permits a two-level nicolaitan caste society of its constituents.

[Mark17]

I forgot, I should not send you emojis. I am using IPhone 6, with IOS 10.3.1, all up to date. 😀 Oops, I just sent another one.

[Elsie]

The history of Roman Catholicism reflects this idea of keeping the Word out of the hands of the average person.

Even the little carpenter's boy was able to read the scroll; 'as was His custom'.

“Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” they asked.

All the people of the synagog were furious...

[Elsie]

But the sad fact is that everyone has several bibles, but few read it. So we gained little.

The first part is true; but the second is not.

We gained MUCH from having the bible in our OWN hands!

The sad part is that NOW we have a plethora of bibles and helps and studies and teachers and preachers and I think that 'familiarity has bred contempt'.

One does not value something you have an abundance of; only something that is rare.

[Elsie]

I am using IPhone 6, with IOS 10.3.1, all up to date.

Just like mine; but in NO way would I use it to communicate on FR unless my laptop; with it's BIG keyboard and all of my resources; has become unavailable to use.

[af_vet_1981]

But in truth, the attempt to emplace Judaists within Christian fellowships was going on, and one of their strategies was to convince a few people that they needed some kind of mediator between them and The Christ--and that would be a nicolaitan priest. And actually also, they are pretty big today, eh?

Are you seriously trying to assert that the Nicolaitans were Jews trying to infiltrate Christian fellowships ?

[af_vet_1981]

All the Jerusalem deacons were Greeks, and for a purpose.

I assume(d) you knew what Ἑλληνιστής (Hellenist, Grecian) meant. The trigger for naming the deacons was a controversy between Jews born in the land of Israel and Jews born in the Greek speaking lands surrounding it. The seven deacons were Jews except for Nicolas, who as a prosletye (a Gentile converting to Judaism).

Only Stephen and Philip are discussed in much detail in Acts; tradition provides nothing further about Nicanor or Parmenas. Stephen became the first martyr of the church when he was killed by a mob, and whose death was agreed to by Saul of Tarsus, the future Apostle Paul (Acts 8:1). Philip evangelized in Samaria, where he converted Simon Magus and an Ethiopian eunuch, traditionally beginning the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.

Tradition calls Prochorus the nephew of Stephen and a companion of John the Evangelist, who consecrated him bishop of Nicomedia in Bithynia (modern-day Turkey). He was traditionally ascribed the authorship of the apocryphal Acts of John, and was said to have ended his life as a martyr in Antioch in the 1st century.[3] According to Caesar Baronius' Annales Ecclesiastici, now considered historically inaccurate, Nicanor was a Cypriot Jew who returned to his native island and died a martyr in 76. Other accounts say he was martyred in "Berj," an unidentified place possibly confused with Botrys. Timon was said to have been a Hellenized Jew who became a bishop in Greece or in Bosra, Syria; in the latter account, his preaching brought the ire of the local governor, who martyred him with fire. After preaching for years in Asia Minor, where Hippolytus of Rome claimed he was bishop of Soli (Pompeiopolis; though he may have been referring to Soli, Cyprus), Parmenas was said to have settled down in Macedonia, where he died at Philippi in 98 during Trajan's persecutions.[citation needed]

Nicholas, who came from Antioch, was described in Acts as a convert to Judaism.[4] He was not remembered fondly by some early writers. According to Irenaeus' Adversus Haereses, the Nicolaitanes, a heretical sect condemned as early as the Book of Revelation, took their name from the deacon.[5] In Philosophumena, Hippolytus writes he inspired the sect through his indifference to life and the pleasures of the flesh; his followers took this as a licence to give in to lust.[6] The Catholic Encyclopedia records a story that after the Apostles reproached Nicholas for mistreating his beautiful wife on account of his jealousy, he left her and consented to anyone else marrying her, saying the flesh should be maltreated.[3] In the Stromata, Clement of Alexandria says the sect corrupted Nicholas' words, originally designed to check the pleasures of the body, to justify licentiousness.[7] The Catholic Encyclopedia notes that the historicity of the story is debatable, though the Nicolaitanes themselves may have considered Nicholas their founder.[3]

[metmom]

I suspect that Mary wasn’t even hinting at a miracle.

Apparently, Joseph wasn’t in the picture any more so as the oldest son, Jesus is the one who Mary would naturally go to if there was a problem.

I think she just mentioned it in a worried mom kind of way, like *Oh No! What are they going to do now?* and maybe expecting him to order some more or come up with some kind of solution. Or maybe just bemoaning the tragedy of it. Like it was something that was NOT good.

There’s no knowing if Jesus had ever given her any reason during His life to expect that He could perform miracles.

One other suspicion that I have is that this may have been a family wedding where somehow they were related to the host and somehow had the ability to actually do something about providing more.

[Mark17]

Just like mine; but in NO way would I use it to communicate on FR unless my laptop; with it's BIG keyboard and all of my resources; has become unavailable to use.

Resources? You mean like that one where Joseph asks, "Mary, are you awake?" Or the 15 (fake) promises of Mary? Or some of the REALLY bad popes, or all the follies of Joe Smith? Those resources? Have you got any resources about the sin of presumption? You know that's my favorite sin. I can't live without committing the sin of presumption. I am such a presumptuous person. Oh well, such is life. 😀😆😄😃 Ah, more emojis. I hope you can see 👀 them.

[Mark17]

One other suspicion that I have is that this may have been a family wedding where somehow they were related to the host and somehow had the ability to actually do something about providing more.

Interesting point MM. I wonder if this was another marriage relationship where the wife was supposed to be an ever virgin? 😆😄 On the other hand, I wonder if the half brothers and sisters of Jesus, the natural children of Mary and Joseph, were serving at the wedding too? Or do you think the stork brought Mary and Joseph their other children, since they allegedly didn't do the deed? 😆😱