Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
Christology is essential to our relationship with God, Q. If we don't agree on Who Christ is, then we have nothing in common but His name. The Apostolic Church teachs that He is two natures, one divine and one human, in one Person, fused, but not confused, inseparable, in perfect harmony.
CHAPTER II: ST. IGNATIUS (AD 116)
…Ignatius had known St. John, and was made bishop of Antioch about thirty years before the Apostle’s death. He had governed his church for forty years or more, when the Emperor Trajan came to Antioch. In the Roman history, Trajan is described as one of the best among the emperors; but he did not treat the Christians well. He seems never to have thought that the Gospel could possibly be true, and thus he did not take the trouble to inquire what the Christians really believed or did. They were obliged in those days to hold their worship in secret, and mostly by night, or very early in the morning, because it would not have been safe to meet openly; and hence, the heathens, who did not know what was done at their meetings, were tempted to fancy all manner of shocking things, such as that the Christians practised magic; that they worshipped the head of an ass; that they offered children in sacrifice; and that they ate human flesh! It is not likely that the Emperor Trajan believed such foolish tales as these; and, when he DID make some inquiry about the ways of the Christians, he heard nothing but what was good of them. But still he might think that there was some mischief behind; and he might fear lest the secret meetings of the Christians should have something to do with plots against his government; and so, as I have said, he was no friend to them.
When Trajan came to Antioch, St. Ignatius was carried before him. The emperor asked what evil spirit possessed him, so that he not only broke the laws by refusing to serve 8the gods of Rome, but persuaded others to do the same. Ignatius answered, that he was not possessed by any evil spirit; that he was a servant of Christ; that by His help he defeated the malice of evil spirits; and that he bore his God and Saviour within his heart. After some more questions and answers, the emperor ordered that he should be carried in chains to Rome, and there should be devoured by wild beasts. When Ignatius heard this terrible sentence, he was so far from being frightened, that he burst forth into thankfulness and rejoicing, because he was allowed to suffer for his Saviour, and for the deliverance of his people.
It was a long and toilsome journey, over land and sea, from Antioch to Rome, and an old man, such as Ignatius, was ill able to bear it, especially as winter was coming on. He was to be chained, too, and the soldiers who had the charge of him behaved very rudely and cruelly to him. And no doubt the emperor thought that, by sending so venerable a bishop in this way to suffer so fearful and so disgraceful a death (to which only the very lowest wretches were usually sentenced), he should terrify other Christians into forsaking their faith. But instead of this, the courage and the patience with which St Ignatius bore his sufferings gave the Christians fresh spirit to endure whatever might come on them.
The news that the holy bishop of Antioch was to be carried to Rome soon spread, and at many places on the way the bishops, clergy, and people flocked together, that they might see him, and pray and talk with him, and receive his blessing. And when he could find time, he wrote letters to various churches, exhorting them to stand fast in the faith, to be at peace among themselves, to obey the bishops who were set over them, and to advance in all holy living. One of the letters was written to the Church at Rome, and was sent on by some persons who were travelling by a shorter way. St. Ignatius begs, in this letter, that the Romans will not try to save him from death. “I am the wheat of God,” he says, “let me be ground by the teeth of beasts, that I may be found the pure bread of Christ. 9Rather do ye encourage the beasts, that they may become my tomb, and may leave nothing of my body, so that, when dead, I may not be troublesome to any one.” He even said that, if the lions should hang back, he would himself provoke them to attack him. It would not be right for ordinary people to speak in this way, and the Church has always disapproved of those who threw themselves in the way of persecution. But a holy man who had served God for so many years as Ignatius, might well speak in a way which could not become ordinary Christians. When he was called to die for his people and for the troth of Christ, he might even take it as a token of God’s favour, and might long for his deliverance from the troubles and the trials of this world, as St. Paul said of himself, that he “had a desire to depart, and to be with Christ” (Phil. i. 23).
He reached Rome just in time for some games which were to take place a little before Christmas; for the Romans were cruel enough to amuse themselves with setting wild beasts to tear and devour men, in vast places called amphitheatres, at their public games. When the Christians of Rome heard that Ignatius was near the city, great numbers of them went out to meet him, and they said that they would try to persuade the people in the amphitheatre to see that he might not be put to death. But he entreated, as he had before done in his letter, that they would do nothing to hinder him from glorifying God by his death; and he knelt down with them, and prayed that they might continue in faith and love, and that the persecution might soon come to an end. As it was the last day of the games, and they were nearly over, he was then hurried into the amphitheatre (called the Coliseum), which was so large that tens of thousands of people might look on. And in this place (of which the ruins are still to be seen), St Ignatius was torn to death by wild beasts, so that only a few of his larger bones were left, which the Christians took up and conveyed to his own city of Antioch.
I suppose it depends on the level of detail.
It is enough for me to know that Christ is:
1. GOD—PART OF THE TRINITY whatever else that means.
2. MY SAVIOR BY VIRTUE OF HIS VOLUNTARILY SHED BLOOD.
3. CREATOR of all that is
4. Coming again to keep me close eternally.
I don’t think of a lot of elaborate details that are essential for me to focus on or even keep in mind in this time/space dimension. They are certainly not essential for me to be able to fellowship with others who love Jesus.
However, if it comes up "heads" when tossed, you might win something in which case the observed event is causal though heads/tails remain complementary.
Beautifully, cogently well-explained, Alamo-Girl!
That you, as the observer, can only face one side of the coin at a time (i.e. from tossing a coin) - is that which is mutually exclusive, you can only see either heads or tails.
This conversation itself is an excellent example of the perils of the observer problem. The coin observer probably realizes that the coin has two sides, one of which he cannot see while facing the other. But that insight is not always carried over to other issues - such as predestination v free will, Triune God, other doctrines/traditions, etc.
For instance, I might say "if my husband is home then the air conditioner will be on." But that doesn't mean the air conditioner will be off if my husband is not home.
Truly, knowing Christ erases all doubt and confusion.
The "elimination" is entirely temporary, lasting only as long as the observed event.
I'm not sure you've grasped what Bohr meant WRT his theory of complementarity: "Even though the wave and the particle behavior of an object are mutually exclusive, we need both to completely understand its properties."
Must run away for now but will be back soon.
Sounds great! But Genesis tells that's not how it happened. God created us out of dirt (inorganic stuff, as Alex correctly put it in another post). Adam and Eve were not "adopted" through [sic] Jesus Christ.
Why were Adam and Eve not adopted through Jesus Christ like everyone else who is saved? After they sinned, they needed saving. Adam was created out of dirt, Eve was created out of bone, and we were created out of flesh. All of us need saving just the same. He knew all of us before we were created physically.
Being born spiritually is a figure of speech. It is a metaphor for belief. The way it is used is a play on words. A misleading play at that. We come to a belief when we realize that something greater than we can imagine created all this.
While it does mean belief, it is no figure of speech. It refers to a very literal thing. Upon being born again, there is an emergence of a completely new being, not existent before (2 Cor. 5:17). I don't understand why you think it is a play on words.
FK: Jer 1:4-5 : 4 The word of the Lord came to me, saying, 5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." This is also classic predestination...
He wrote that in retrospect. Anyone can say the same thing: "God predestined me to do this..." in retrospect. What is always lacking is prospective knowledge of this kind.
What??? He was DIRECTLY quoting God, AND it's in the Bible. It almost sounds like you are asserting the possibility that God never said this. ...... What do you mean by "prospective knowledge of this kind"? You know of prophecy proven true in future times. Do you mean someone prophesying the future words spoken by God? If you do, then see every OT quote made by Christ.
Fact is, the Church does not teach Paul as the Protestants interpret him because the Church concentrates on other apostolic teachings and find a common denominator or the most prevalent denominator as the orthodox teaching. The protestants simply take Paul as the standard and fit or reject the rest.
But that doesn't make logical sense. I am often reminded that I should be thanking the Church for giving me the Bible. Yet, the Church made Paul "THE STAR" of the entire NT in terms of ink. Why would the Church do that, if their intent was just to send Paul to the corner in favor of other teachings?
For obvious reasons, the Church will never say that any one of the Apostles was wrong. But at the same time, the Church will not build its theology based on one of them, even an essential one (who also happens to be a controversial self-appointed later-comer whose teachings were not always in synch with the rest).
I'm not aware of anyone who builds his theology based on only Paul. We base ours on the whole of the Bible. Since Paul's writings consume a disproportionately large amount of the NT, many of our teachings come THROUGH Paul, as opposed to "from" Paul. It can be a subtle difference, but our belief is not hinged on whether Paul "understood" correctly, or anything like that. We KNOW that everything that Paul wrote was God-inspired, and therefore perfect. It is the same with every other Biblical author. IOW, we don't judge the "correctness" of a scripture quote based on any theological "favorites". ALL scripture is equally God- inspired.
Do you really think that Paul was self-appointed? To me, that would make him a fraud.
I appreciate that. Thank you very much, my friend. :)
AMEN!
VI. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.[12] Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word:[13] and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.[14] VII. All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all:[15] yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.[16] VIII. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical;[17] so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them.[18] But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them,[19] therefore they are to be translated in to the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come,[20] that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship Him in an acceptable manner;[21] and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.[22] IX. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.[23] X. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.[24]V. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the Church to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scripture.[10] And the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is, to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it does abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God: yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.[11]
The souls are not pre-fabricated in advance. That is a pagan, even Gnostic belief.
Why were Adam and Eve not adopted through Jesus Christ like everyone else who is saved?
Because God apparently thought the world needed to wait a few thousand years before Christ showed up. In the meantime, He tried everything else, it seems, floods, giants, plagues, you name it.
Besides, I already told you I don't know where the Church is getting the idea that Christ went to Hades to rescue the OT "righteous," including Adam and Eve, nor do I know why Adam and Eve would have been "righteous." All this is nebulous, legendary and mythical to me — and certainly not biblical.
But it's part of our Tradition because this is mentioned in the Divine Liturgy which goes back at least 1,700 years if not longer, which means that the Church believed it as early as the 4th century, probably earlier.
The only hint is from +Peter saying that Christ preached to the dead (one can understand that as spiritually dead too), but that's a far cry from breaking down the doors of Hell, and yanking the OT righteous, including Adam and Eve.
Let's not forget that at His Transfiguration on Mount Tabor, Moses and Elijah were there...physically! That means Moses was not in hell...
Upon being born again, there is an emergence of a completely new being, not existent before (2 Cor. 5:17). I don't understand why you think it is a play on words.
There is no new being born. There is one and the same person who dropped his arrogance and pride and decided to obey God's will, to accept God's free offer and follow Him, as in "sell everything you have and follow Me." Clinging to God is a decision.
What??? He was DIRECTLY quoting God, AND it's in the Bible. It almost sounds like you are asserting the possibility that God never said this
It is in retrospect because Jeremiah is talking about his past, concluding that God set him apart. As far as directly quoting God, this is where we do not agree. I do not believe the Bible is a literal word of God. I believe it contains God's truths, along with legends and myths, embellished with human desires, culture and historical issues.
Yet, the Church made Paul "THE STAR" of the entire NT in terms of ink. Why would the Church do that, if their intent was just to send Paul to the corner in favor of other teachings?
The Church does not diminish +Paul. The Church interprets him differently than the Protestants or, for that matter, heretics (i.e. Marcion).
Do you really think that Paul was self-appointed? To me, that would make him a fraud
I have a strong suspicion that he did appoint himself, but that he honestly believed it was his destiny.
My contention is that the duality of the "coin" or the wave/particle models of radiant energy are human creations that do not reflect or complete the phenomena in nature as they truly are. So to speak of them as if they really provide complementary knowledge of how things truly are is a delusion no different than Aristotelian logic, or Ptolemy's navigational system.
You are soooo right, Q. Ultimately, what matters is that we say "Thy will be done" and be at peace.
FOREST KEEPER: He knew all of us before we were created physically
KOSTA: The souls are not pre-fabricated in advance. That is a pagan, even Gnostic belief.
"Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him." -- Isaiah 43:7 "Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee" -- Isaiah 44:2
"Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?" -- Job 38:36 "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee" -- Jeremiah 1:5
"For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them." -- Psalms 139:13-16
"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?" -- 1 Corinthians 4:7
The soul is not independent of its Creator. We are the sum and substance of that which the Creator ordained from before the foundation of the world.
The Jews believed, maybe still do, all souls were created before the beginning of the world, so it’s not a pagan belief.
That’s interesting. Thanks. They probably read the Old Testament, too. 8~)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.