Will the Pope's Pronouncement Set Ecumenism Back a Hundred Years? (Challenge to Apostolicity)

Progressive Theology ^ | July 07

[kosta50]

Is that a yes?

I can't answer that. if you read what I wreote, that would be obvious. Good bye.

[kosta50]

it was MarkBsnr whom you were first "correcting" by your "hell is just an illusionary state of deprivation" argument. Here's what Mark had to say, which sounds pretty literal to me (and correct)...

That is between Mark and his Church. His Church does not teach what his quote seems to suggest. I quoted from the Catechism. If he is saying what you claim he is saying, rather than jusr referencing, then he is also in conflict with his Pope. I doubt that Mark meant to say what you imply he said, but I will let him settle this issue.

[kosta50]

She practiced the discipline (praying) but her prayers were practically unintelligible because she rattled it off so fast from memory and it was just taken for granted that saying those words was supposed to be done. Do you know what I mean?

Like lighting candles out of "habit" or going to church just to be seen...they are empty gestures.

[kosta50]

Wow. So according to you and the EO, God's wrath and eternal damnation are like Robin Williams' definition of Canada -- a loft apartment above a really great party?

The EOC does not know a wrathful God.

[P-Marlowe]

The EOC does not know a wrathful God.

Then the EOC does not know God.

[P-Marlowe]

Good bye.

    * Sayonara 
    * Auf Wiedersehen 
    * Arrivederci 
    * Au Revoir 
    * Hejdo 
    * Ciao 
    * Le'hitraot 
    * Sampai Jumpa 
    * Adios 
    * Paalam 
    * Zai Jian 
    * Farvel 
    * Namaste 
    * Aloha

[kosta50]

If our hell is merely a psychic malaise, then so was Christ's separation from God. But He showed us clearly that it wasn't -- it was objective and real and devastating

I never said it wasn't real. You are making things up as you go along. You are putting words in my mouth that I never siad. That's fraud.

Peter Chopelas writes in an article reviewed by Orthodox Church officials in America

The idea that God is an angry figure who sends those He condemns to a place called Hell, where they spend eternity in torment separated from His presence, is missing from the Bible and unknown in the early church. While Heaven and Hell are decidedly real, they are experiential conditions rather than physical places, and both exist in the presence of God. In fact, nothing exists outside the presence of God.

Note here that God is present but He is experienced by the soul as absent. This experience (state) of God's absence is hell. Ergo, God is, by definition, not present in hell to the soul which is in (a state of) hell.

he than contrasts this with the traditional Western view (since then the Catholics have moved closer to the Patristic view of the 1st millennium):

This is not the way traditional Western Christianity, Roman Catholic or Protestant, has envisioned the afterlife. In Western thought Hell is a location, a place where God punishes the wicked, where they are cut off from God and the Kingdom of Heaven. Yet this concept occurs nowhere in the Bible, and does not exist in the original languages of the Bible.

The Orthodox understanding of heaven and hell is our state of existence in the presence of God. His love is either experienced as joy in those who love Him and burning in those who hate Him.

While there is no question that according to the scriptures there is torment and "gnashing of teeth" for the wicked, and glorification for the righteous, and that this judgment comes from God, these destinies are not separate destinations. The Bible indicates that everyone comes before God in the next life, and it is because of being in God's presence that they either suffer eternally, or experience eternal joy. In other words, both the joy of heaven, and the torment of judgment, is caused by being eternally in the presence of the Almighty, the perfect and unchanging God

This is not a new concept

This is not a new interpretation or a secret truth. It has been there all along, held by the Church from the beginning, revealed in the languages of the Scriptures, which were spoken by the Christians of the early church era. This understanding was held by nearly all Christians everywhere for the first 1000 years of the Church's existence, and, except where influence by western theologies, continued to be held by Christians beyond Western Europe and America even up to this day (including the roughly 350 million Orthodox Christians worldwide).

He then goes into very detailed analysis of different words used for hell in both Greek and Hebrew

When you examine in context the source words which are translated as "hell" in English language Bibles the original understanding becomes clear. You will find that "hell" is translated from four different Greek and Hebrew words. These words are not interchangeable in the original language, yet, incredibly, in English-language bibles these words are translated differently in different places to fit the translators' theology (rather than allow the words of scripture to determine their theology). Not only did English translators dump these four very different words into one meaning, they were not even consistent with it and chose to translate these same words with different meanings in different places. It is no wonder that English readers of the Bible are confused.

The article is rather long, going into ancient concepts of afterlife, etc. so I will stop here. I have no problem with your mistaken interpretations. That will be your burden when you answer for your deeds. That you rejected the Church despite the fact that it was given to you on many on occasion is something you will have to explain, for as the Bible says "For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."—Mat 12:37

[suzyjaruki]

* Sampai Jumpa

My favorite - what language is this?

[kosta50]

Then the EOC does not know [a Protestant] God

Yup

досвидания

[P-Marlowe]

Indonesian

[P-Marlowe]

Then the EOC does not know [a Protestant] God

From www.eastern-orthodoxy.com:

If you, dear reader, participate in such discussions and propagate controversies do not expect the blessing of God in your life. As we noticed that some of these also slander monastic communities in the USA, the wrath of God will come upon them. Christ does not treat lightly those who condemn His monastics. Even if some monastic said a wrong word or did something not right, it is for his spiritual father and the Church to examine these issues and not for the internet, where exploitation can happen so easily.

If Christ allowed the Revolution in Russia to happen the very day the take-over of the Holy Mountain was being prepared, what do you think He will do to those who slander the good standing of the Holy Garden of Panagia?

There are countless of stories of the wrath of God against those who slandered Athos and the other blessed monastic communities. And, if one problem does present itself, fervent prayer will always bring the blessed fruits we seek so long as we have love and faith.

Maybe kosta does not know the EOC God.

[P-Marlowe]

THE ACT OF THE TRUE ORTHODOX CHURCH OF GREECE (1949)

In 1949, the Synod of Metropolitan Matthew of Athens, Archbishop of the True Orthodox Church of Greece, assembled at Keratea in Attica and declared the following condemnation of Freemasonry. [From The Rudder, Orthodox Christian Education Society, Chicago 1983, p. 550]:

Declaration Against Freemasonry - By the True Orthodox Church of Greece

Wherefore clad in the sacred vestments of epitrachilion and omophorion, we say, If any man preach unto you any other gospel than that which we have preached unto you, even though an angel from heaven, let him be anathema (Galatians I8:9). As many as are befitting, that pursue after such a diabolical and lawless employment of Freemasonry, and all they that follow unto their infatuation and unto their error, let them be excommuicated and accursed by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. After death, they shall be unpardoned, indissoluble, and bloated. Groaning and trembling, as Cain, shall they be upon the earth (Genesis 4:14). The earth shall cleave and swallow them up, as Dathan and Abiram (Numbers 16:31-32). The wrath of God shall be upon their heads, and their portion together with Judas the betrayer. An angel of the Lord will prosecute them with a flaming sword and, unto their life;s termination, they will not know of progress. Let their works and toil be unblessed and let them become a cloud of dust, as of a summer threshing-floor. And all they indeed that shall abide still unto their wickedness will have such a recompense. But as many as shall go out from the midst of them and shall be separated, and having spat out their abominable heresy, and shall go afar off from their accursed infatuation, such kind shall receive the wagers of the zealot Phineas; rather let them be blesed and forgiven by the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the Only unconfused and undivided Trinity, the One God in nature, and by us His servants."

X Archbishop Matthew of Athens and all Greece (President of the Holy Synod)
X Metropolitan Spyridon II of Trimythus
X Metropolitan Andrew of Patras
X Metropolitan Demetrius of Thessalonica
X Metropolitan Callistus of Corinth
X Archpriest Eugene Tombros (Secretary of the Holy Synod).

Maybe kosta is not familiar with the Greek Orthodox God either?

[P-Marlowe]

From www.eastern-orthodixy.com

Heresy and the Wrath of God

The sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, lit their censers, laid incense on them and censed the tent of meeting. But they didn't perform the ritual properly; they offered "strange fire" to the Lord, i.e. other than what the Lord expected from them. And the Lord not only rejected their offering but consumed them with fire (Levit. 10:1). Yet the sons of Aaron thought they were doing something pleasing to God. They thought...

Now if the Lord is so wrathful over a matter such as that, how much more so will He be when the contravention of His ordinances has to do with questions of vital importance, such as the faith.

Both Arius and Nestor suffered frightful deaths. In both cases, their bowels burst.

.

Oh my, God killed them!

I do believe, dosta, that you are misrepresenting the orthodox position on the idea of a wrathful God.

[P-Marlowe]

Fron the Catechism of the EOC:

Q. Was it necessary that the Son of God should become a man?

A. Yes; that He might save man it was necessary that as a man He should give men the right teaching about God and all other heavenly teachings, that He might enlighten the minds of men, and that He might satisfy the divine Justice with the sacrifice of His sinless life and reconcile to their Creator the creatures who were under the wrath of God.

[blue-duncan]

While there is no question that according to the scriptures there is torment and “gnashing of teeth” for the wicked, and glorification for the righteous, and that this judgment comes from God, these destinies are not separate destinations. The Bible indicates that everyone comes before God in the next life, and it is because of being in God’s presence that they either suffer eternally, or experience eternal joy. In other words, both the joy of heaven, and the torment of judgment, is caused by being eternally in the presence of the Almighty, the perfect and unchanging God

So then, your concept of heaven and hell is pretty much the same condition as prevails now, with believers and unbelievers working and at leisure together except one understands and enjoys being in the presence of god and the other understanding and not enjoying the presence of god. All other things are equal since they are all in the same physical location.

Do those in torment enjoy the privileges of a renovated heaven and earth? Are they subject to disease and man’s inhumanity while the believers are exempt from these discomforts in their presence? Who enforces peace in a world populated by believers and unbelievers in the presence of God?

Isn’t your god more a God of wrath by subjecting the unbeliever to live in the presence of those enjoying the benefits of salvation? Seems like He’s rubbing salt in the punishment and causing envy and jealousy.

[Forest Keeper]

I would say that ‘faith’ is normally measured against the norms of the religion and that ‘religion’ is the sum total of the beliefs contained within that particular belief set.

OK, so then you would consider the Methodists and the Lutherans to be two separate religions? I'm not sure what is technically proper. I've always thought of the above as different faiths within the religion of Christianity (along with Catholicism as another faith).

[Forest Keeper]

If they are ordained, then how are they ordained? What would happen if you forsook all prayers from this moment forward? Would you still attain Heaven? Would your place in Heaven be diminished?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "how". Prayer itself is in obedience to God, and glorifies Him. Therefore, it is good. All the good I do is God working through me, so in that sense it is ordained, and I benefit. ...... IF we assume that prayer is a significant part of perseverance, then I do not think God would let me give it up permanently. I could choose to stray and become a slacker for a while, but God would either bring me around, or He would take me home before my salvation was lost. And, yes, I would assume that my reward in Heaven would be lesser for the time I gave up praying.

The Calvinistic approach really doesn’t make sense to me since prayer consists of such things as asking for God’s help, and since nothing that we do matters, then what does asking for God’s help accomplish?

As above, it glorifies God as it is in obedience to Him. Prayer is certainly not for the purpose of informing God of our needs (Matt. 6:8). Rather, it is for our benefit as it is communication with God, which He desires. Also, when we pray and ask Him for things we are reminded of our dependence on Him (e.g. God is the only one who can help me out of this mess, etc.), and this helps us to develop a deeper love for Him, all good things. So, a Calvinist would not say that nothing we do matters, it certainly matters to us! :)

[Forest Keeper]

You are a visionary and a theological giant. I bow to you and offer to purchase vast quantities of Guinness for your own edification and amusement. When may the rejoicing begin?

Immediately my good man, you are most kind. :)

"Mmmmmm ...... edification and amusement"

[Forest Keeper]

There was no salvation prior to Christ. Everyone was subject to death.

If Jesus' sacrifice was not retroactive, then He did not come to save the "whole world", as you believe, but only those who lived during His earthly life or after Him. Why do you think His sacrifice applies to you now, since you didn't exist back then, but it doesn't apply to those who came before Jesus within time? Consider these:

Matt 8:11 : I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.

Luke 13:27-28 : 27 "But he will reply, 'I don't know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!' 28 "There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out.

So, are you saying that Jesus did not sacrifice for Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the prophets? Is there really more than one way to get to Heaven?

[kosta50]

As we noticed that some of these also slander monastic communities in the USA, the wrath of God will come upon them...Maybe kosta does not know the EOC God

Yawn, in all these instances, the expression "the wrath of God" is a figure of speech. It bears no resemblance to the western juridical view. If you bother to study Orthodox theology rather then superficial sloganisms, you will find out that the Orthodox concept of God is that He is unchanging, that He is not loving one minute and angry another.

"God loves not only those who dwell in Paradise, but also those who are in Hell; in Hell, however, the Divine love constitutes a cause of suffering for the wicked. This is not due to God's love but to their own wickedness, which resents this love and experiences it as a torment" ["I Believe: A Short Exposition of Orthodox Doctrine," Orthodoxinfo.com]

St. John of Damascus (8th c.) writes:

Many of the things relating to God, therefore, that are dimly understood cannot be put into fitting terms, but on things above us we cannot do else than express ourselves according to our limited capacity; as, for instance, when we speak of God we use the terms sleep, and wrath, and regardlessness, hands, too, and feet, land such like expressions. [An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book I, Chapter II, "Concerning things utterable and things unutterable, and things knowable and thinks unknowable"]

Nowhere in the entire collection of four lengthy books does St. John of Damascus, the last of the desert fathers, speak of God's wrath the way Protestants do. If some modern-day Orthodox bishops use such terms as "original sin" and "God's wrath" it's because of the influence of the west and because, as you may know, many an American Orthodox is a former Protestant convert and they bring a lot of their Protestant baggage with them (inadvertently, of course).

St. John of Damascus's work deals with the entire Orthodox theology, and the wrath of God is not in it. This doesn't mean we don't suffer for our unrepentant sins, we do, but it's not due to the vindictiveness of God.

Nice of youto take your time to check what i write. It gives me a chance to explain things in greater detail, since you seem to care so much (sarcasm).

But have to disagree with you (again, surprise): I think I know my Orthodox God better than you think. I am actually quite amused with your arrogance to tell me that I don't. It's really pathetic.