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]

[ealgeone]

The indoctrinated Roman Catholic cannot see the forest due to the trees on this issue.

Again, would the Mary we see in the NT place such a strong emphasis on her??

The whole thing is a rejection of Christ.

[MHGinTN]

You offered what was an opinion regarding spaceless and timeless but did not characterize it as such. I merely offered to you what God’s Spirit has shown to me regarding the nature of the Universe as revealed in scriptures. I have been pondering this subject for decades. What I offered to you has taken years to coalesce to the degree that I can put it into words most do understand. Take or leave it ... your teachers are not what you believe them to be.

[MHGinTN]

You daily expose why I choose to call catholiciism ‘a nother religion’. I believe Paul identified it well, for he delineated what is false gospel and the catholiciism of today is a false religion, complete with the pagan goddess figure able to hear and act on prayers of millions being offered simultaneously ... in their Magic Thinking. Modern Catholicism harkens back to the religion of Nimrod!

[imardmd1]

The comment about having withheld the best wine until last contradicts that idea

Actually, it does, and you don't know what you are talking about because you infer something that is not there. It comes from a pejorative twist you give to the Scriptures (as usual).

And I'm not going to follow this with you because it is off-topic and you are being argumentative, as anyone can see. Period.

[ealgeone]

Thank you, brother!

[Elsie]

She was hinting, "They are not having wine at this wedding."

Not hardly!

---

9 When the headwaiter tasted the water which had become wine, and did not know where it came from (but the servants who had drawn the water knew), the headwaiter *called the bridegroom, 10 and *said to him, “Every man serves the good wine first, and when the people have [d]drunk freely, then he serves the poorer wine; but you have kept the good wine until now.”

[Elsie]

Clearly, what you post from Catholic sources contradicts the effluent from Vlad, but he never seems to notice.

Oh; he notices all right!

---

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply.

These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the conspiracy or  coverup.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.  Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor,  etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen,  and you never have to deal with the issues.

.

.

.

[Elsie]

I have never walked invisibly through a room, have you?

https://youtu.be/vJG698U2Mvo

[af_vet_1981]

Nowhere in the NT do we find an example of resurrecting a religious system that was put to death when Jesus completely satisfied it. The planting of New Testament local Christian assemblies did NOT include forming a clergy.

And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.


And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.


Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek. And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem. And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.


Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Acts, chapter one, Protestant verses fifteen to twenty six
Acts, Catholic chapter fourteen, Protestant verse twenty three,
Acts, Catholic chapter sixteen, Protestant verses one to five,
Hebrews, Catholic chapter thirteen, Protestant verse seventeen,

as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[MHGinTN]

Your last paragraph is about clergy but about submitting to the rulers in each town/region, etc. These are not clergy, they are rulers.

[MHGinTN]

Your last paragraph is NOT about clergy

[af_vet_1981]

So what is this presumed Nicolaus doing at Ephesus, anyway?

False;
The scripture does not say Nicolas/Nicolaus/Nikolaus was at Ephesus. Rather there were "them them that hold the doctrine of Balaam" and "them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans" at Pergamum, which the Messiah held against the angel of the church of Pergamum. The angel of the church of Ephesus was commended for hating "the deeds of the Nicolaitans."

Nicolaism refers to one or more groups of doctrines, apparently held by a group or groups founded by a Nicolaus, Nicolas, or Nikolaos (depending on exactly how you Anglicize the Greek name). There are a couple of these mentioned in the very early church, but it's unclear what exactly the content of the heresy is. You refer to "the practice of ruling over the laity", apparently with regard to the etymology of Nikolaos—Greek nikē "victory" + laos "people"; though if the name of the sect was taken from the name of its founder, rather than from a description of its doctrines, then this association fails and the sect should not necessarily be associated with "ruling over the laity".

The sect appears to be mentioned in Revelation 2:6,15:

you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. (v. 6)

you also have some people who hold to the teaching of [the] Nicolaitans. (v. 15)
(New American Bible)

but there is no description of what the works or teaching of the Nicolaitans is, nor why they should be hated.

In his edition of Irenaeus' Libros quinque adversus haereses (Five Books Against Heresies), W. Wigan Harvey states:

The Nicolaitans taught the complete indifference of human actions in a moral point of view. ... Another hateful feature of this heresy was the assertion, that in times of persecution, principle might be ignored, and conformity rendered to mysteries however abominable, and rites however impure.
Harvey makes clear his opinion (which he bases on writings of Clement of Alexandria) that this sect gets its name from Nicolas (Nicholas) of Antioch, one of the seven deacons described in Acts 6:

"Brothers, select from among you seven reputable men, filled with the Spirit and wisdom, whom we shall appoint to this task, whereas we shall devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word." The proposal was acceptable to the whole community, so they chose Stephen, a man filled with faith and the holy Spirit, also Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicholas of Antioch, a convert to Judaism.
(Acts 6:3–5; NABRE)

If this is indeed the case, as I mentioned above, the name "Nicolaitans" should be associated not with "ruling over the laity" but simply with the (birth-)name "Nicolas".

There is no evidence that this group evolved into the modern Catholic Church; in fact, Eusebius states in his History of the Church that the sect "lasted for a very short time".

[boatbums]

It does make one wonder what happened to the “simplicity that is in Christ”, doesn’t it?

[ealgeone]

It does make one wonder what happened to the “simplicity that is in Christ”, doesn’t it?

Easy answer why...if you keep it complicated the average person can't figure it out. This keeps control to the priesthood.

The history of Roman Catholicism reflects this idea of keeping the Word out of the hands of the average person. With the advent of the printing press those days are thankfully over.

[PeterPrinciple]

The history of Roman Catholicism reflects this idea of keeping the Word out of the hands of the average person. With the advent of the printing press those days are thankfully over.

---

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

Isaiah’s Commission from the Lord

Isa 6:8 Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to this people? Who will go for us?” I said, “Here I am. Send me.”
Isa 6:9 And He said, “Yes, go, and say to this people, ‘Listen carefully, but do not understand. Watch closely, but learn nothing.’
Isa 6:10 Harden the hearts of these people. Plug their ears and shut their eyes. That way, they will not see with their eyes, nor hear with their ears, nor understand with their hearts and turn to Me for healing.”
Isa 6:11 Then I said, “Lord, how long will this go on?”

[imardmd1]

That's very creative, but:

you also have some people who hold to the teaching of [the] Nicolaitans. (v. 15)(New American Bible)

"Also" means "over and above" or "in addition to" and does not associate this additional doctrine with that antinomian one of Balaam, who taught adversaries to get the Israelites to sin against God.

but there is no description of what the works or teaching of the Nicolaitans is, nor why they should be hated.

Of course there is. It is right there in the word classifying the practice of the group. It is not the name of an Apostle-selected man of Godly disposition and life, never mentioned as being otherwise! You are simply repeating the same creation by the original priest-makers of a tale that directs the attention of their gullible followers away from the kind of organizational activity that Jesus hates: the effort to create a clergy class to psychologically and economically dominate those who have to earn a living to feed themselves and their children--who would become the "lay" class not encouraged to become spiritually mature enough to make and teach more disciples from their daily acquaintances, and thus preserving Jesus' Way of Life apart from interference of a clergy.

Why is it that you do not see that in appointing these deacons, The Apostles were NOT creating a class of priests, but of servants, of ministers, of stewards of the collection and distribution of necessary goods to the needy of Jerusalem.

My goodness! Though the Apostles were especially selected to inaugurate churches of Christ throughout Judea, and Samaria, even to the ends of the Earth, they were NOT to act as priests. They were NOT to even contemplate the humanistic kind of power-grabbing structure of inserting themselves as conduits through which one must go to get God's attention! They themselves were not, and never claimed to be priests! 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.

Is it not clear to you that the RCC and its stepdaughters Lutheran, Anglican, Episcopalian, Methodist all copy this hated domineering structure of two-class religions? And solidifying its hegemony by placing its center of power outside of, and untouchable by the members of its local churches?

Standing right in the middle of it, you tell me it doesn't exist? And you expect me or any thinking person to agree with you?

I'm flabbergasted by your boldness in maintaining an obviously untenable hypocritical thesis about "Nicolaitans".

Nicolaitans are those who form two-class religious societies, support them, and are officers of them, IMO.

The true priest is every member of a local, independent, autonomous assembly of believers, that baptizes professing born-anew professsors of faith in Christ, observes the Remembrance Supper regularly, preaches and teaches strong Bible doctrine, and keeps its practices clean by Scriptural church discipline. Its pro-tem offices are those appointed by concensus of the brethren.

That is who the real priests are. No nicolaitan priests need apply.

[af_vet_1981]

Your last paragraph is about clergy but about submitting to the rulers in each town/region, etc. These are not clergy, they are rulers.

False; those rulers are spiritual rulers. They were introduced ten verses previously (I will repost both references to rulers in Hebrews, followed up with passages written to Timothy, of whom the Apostle Paul was spiritual father, and appointed a bishop). The Apostle reinforces the lesson that those who submit and obey Bishop Timothy will profit thereby, where Timothy will save both himself and those who hear him.

Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.


Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Hebrews, Catholic chapter thirteen, Protestant verse seven,
Hebrews, Catholic chapter thirteen, Protestant verse seventeen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James


And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;


This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)


If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. These things command and teach. Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity. Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all. Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.


Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

First Timothy, Catholic chapter one, Protestant verse twelve,
First Timothy, Catholic chapter three, Protestant verses one to five,
First Timothy, Catholic chapter four, Protestant verses six to sixteen,
First Timothy, Catholic chapter five, Protestant verse seventeen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[MHGinTN]

Thank you.

[af_vet_1981]

"Also" means "over and above" or "in addition to" and does not associate this additional doctrine with that ...

I did not equate them. Doctrine of Baalam and doctrine of Nicolas does not imply doctrine of Baalam equals doctrine of Nicolas. Your question about Nicolas being in Ephesus was incorrect. Pergamum, not Ephesus, had those who held the doctrine of Baalam and those who held the doctrine of the Nicolaitans.

Of course there is. It is right there in the word classifying the practice of the group.

Circular argument not borne out by the scriptures or tradition (except as an antiCatholic tradition)

Why is it that you do not see that in appointing these deacons, The Apostles were NOT creating a class of priests, ...

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

[imardmd1]

Regarding these passages:

There is not one clue in any of these citations from which you can build a doctrine of establishing a clergy of priests, nor of superseding the authority over a local church other than spiritual elders answering directly to The Head Jesus on the one hand, and accountability to the congregation on the other. So take your licks and quit on this approach.

Realize that catholicity sprang out of Irenaus and others like his fellow priest-makers to start grabbing power not authorized in the Bible.

And, of course, that is also why this priestly class doesn't want any back-channel communication of the Holy Spirit with the "lay" constituent through reading and applying such things as Jesus has commanded in it, without priestly censorship.