Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (12916)	10/16/2006 4:24:44 PM
From: Cyprian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

I am aware you follow a version/genre of Christianity different from most other "Christians" and which I believe you call "orthodox". Is it Russian Orthodox or Greek Orthodox and, if not, what is it? Yes, it's true that Orthodoxy is completely different than other denominations or sects operating under the guise and banner of Christianity. Simply put, that's because Christ's holy Church is One. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism (Ephesians 4.5) So the sacred Scripture is clear. There can only be one true faith, not thousands of different sects and denominations who oppose one another in certain doctrines. Christ's One, Holy, Catholic (meaning universal), and Apostolic Church is that which we call Orthodox and Catholic. It is not Roman. In Christ's One true Church there are no ethnic or national differences. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10.12-13) and... There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. (Galatians 3.28-29) So you see, all Christians are ONE in Christ Jesus, no matter their nationality or ethnicity. Notice as well that all Christians of faith are Abraham's seed, just as Christ is the seed of Abraham. Christians become joint heirs with Christ and recipients of the promises given to the holy Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. So now let's return to that statement from the article posted in post 12896. They believe the return of Jews to the Holy Land and establishment of Israel are proof of God's promises to biblical patriarchs. Who are these "biblical patriarchs" these Protestant evangelicals refer to? Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made..." (Galatians 3.16) Obviously the promises these evangelicals refer to are the promises the Lord made to Abraham, which were passed down to Abraham's son Isaac, and then to Jacob, etc. So if the ingathering of the unbelieving Jewish exiles into Palestine is proof of God's faithfulness to his promises to the patriarch Abraham as the evangelicals would have us believe... Then it would be necessary to demonstrate that these Zionists are truly children of Abraham. But simply being generated from Abraham's loins does not make one a child of Abraham, as the holy Scripture testifies. First let's look at the writing of Moses: And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. (Genesis 22.1-2) Notice how God spoke of Isaac as Abraham's ONLY son, even though we know that Ishmael came forth from Abraham's loins long before Isaac. St. Paul explains how this can be quite beautifully in his epistle to the Roman Christians: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. (Romans 9.7-8) So one must be a child of promise to be counted as the seed of Abraham. Ishmael was born after the flesh, and not according to the promise, so that is why he was not accounted as an heir to the promises. So what does it mean to be the promised seed of Abraham? For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect (Romans 4.13-14) NOTICE that they which are of the law (the Jews) ARE NOT THE HEIRS. Therefore Paul says it is of FAITH. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. (Galatians 4.28) St. Paul wrote this in his epistle to the Galatians, which is modern-day Turkey. So when he says "brethren", he does not mean brethren in the sense of Jewish blood-relatives of Abraham. He is writing to Christian converts in Galatia. So he is likening Christians who share the faith of Abraham, as brethren and Isaac, the ONLY son of Abraham. (c.f. Gen 22.2) If Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son, and the holy Apostle Paul says that his Christian brethren are Isaac, and the children of promise, then he is implicitly showing that ONLY Christians are the true children of Abraham. This mantra that is so often repeated these days that "all three great so-called 'monotheistic' religions -- Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all share Abraham as father is LIES, LIES, LIES. As I have just demonstrated from the holy Scriptures, both Old Testament and New. So the dastardly Mohammedans can claim to be recipients of the promises through Ishmael all they want, but Holy Writ explains that the promise must come through the child of promise Isaac, not Ishmael. The impious Jews (along with their deviant evangelical co-conspirators) can claim that these self-styled Jews are the literal descendants of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, thereby staking the claim that they are the recipients of the promises to the patriarchs, but as I have shown, Christ says you need to do the works of Abraham, and imitate his faith to be accounted for as his children. They [the Jews] answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. (John 8.39-40) So you see, the Holy Scripture is Truth and Light and scatters the darkness. The Mohammedans, the Papists, the Jews and the Protestants ARE ALL ZIONISTS. Was it not the Mohammedans that conquered Jerusalem and burned down the (Orthodox) Church of the Holy Sepulchre? What did the Papist Urban the II do (a while later) in response? He preached a "crusade" under the banner of the cross and the Franks acting on behalf of the Pope arrived in Jerusalem in 1099 and slaughtered Mohammedans, Jews, AND Orthodox Christians as well. So you have Moslems and Roman Papists killing over a piece of dirt in Palestine. They are both examples of Zionist crusaders. Of course there is a long Jewish crusader history. The Jews crusaded against the Romans in the time of Nero and were exiled, only to launch another crusade under Simeon bar Kochba around 135 a.d. Later you had Jewish Zionist crusades under David Al-Roy and Shabbtai Zevi. The latest Zionist crusade is carried out by the agents of the house of Red Shield. However this time the Protestants and Papists are aiding the Jews in this Zionist crusade. So Jews, Moslems, Papists and Protestants have all stained their hands with blood throughout history with their Zionist crusades. But not Christ's holy and blameless Orthodox Church. The only true Church of Christ.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (12916)	10/16/2006 6:33:48 PM
From: Cyprian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

Please forgive me, I got a little sidetracked in my previous response. You asked about Greek and Russian Orthodox Christians. All Orthodox Christians, whether Greeks, Russians, Palestinians, Serbians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Armenians, Chinese, Africans, Turkish, Englishmen, Spanish, French, etc. adhere to the New Testament Gospel of Christ. There are Chinese martyrs Orthodox Christians venerate (martyred during the Boxer Rebellion); we venerate St. Moses the Ethiopian (very black-skinned); we venerate St. Patrick the Enlightener of Ireland, and many more from all countries and ethnicities. My patron Saint Cyprian was bishop of Carthage in the middle of the 3rd century which is in northern Africa. The Blessed Augustine was bishop of Hippo in the same region. St. Athanasius the Great is a highly venerated saint in the Orthodox Church from the 3rd century and he was patriarch of Alexandria, as was St. Cyril, which is of course in Africa. St. Catherine the Great is from this African region as well. Holy Orthodoxy is the Church of the New Testament, and no other "Church" can lay claim to that. All one must do is simply read the New Testament with a sincere and humble heart and he will quickly learn that what Protestants teach is contrary to the Holy Gospel. He will quickly learn that what Papists preach is contrary to the Holy Gospel. Of course he will also learn that what Mohammedans and Jews teach is contrary to the Holy Gospel of Christ as well. One will never find anything in the Holy Orthodox Church that contradicts the Gospel of Christ. The Holy Orthodox Church is the Church that was prophesied by the holy prophets and founded by Christ along with His holy Apostles. Now all Orthodox Christians agree on the dogmas of the Faith. To disagree or to bring in some innovating doctrine as the Papists and Protestants have done means to be cut-off from Holy Church. For instance, the Papists arrogantly thought that they could change the holy Symbol of Faith that all Orthodox Christians must adhere to as it was set down by the holy fathers of the First and Second Ecumenical Councils of the Church. This would be the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, or what many shorten and call the Nicene Creed. All Christians must adhere to this confession. If one does not confess the following articles of faith, they simply are not a Christian. I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages : Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father, through whom all things were made. For us and for our salvation He came down from heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man. Crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, He suffered and was buried. On the third day He rose, according to the Scriptures; He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. Of His kingdom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke through the prophets. In one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come. Amen. This Symbol of Faith is confessed by millions of Orthodox Christians every day in their prayers and every Sunday at Church worldwide. It makes no difference if you are a Russian or a Greek or in what language you say it in, just as long as you adhere to the articles contained therein. The first seven articles were set down unanimously by the 318 Holy Fathers that convened from around the world at the First Ecumenical Council called by the holy and blessed Emperor Constantine the Great in Nicea, 325 A.D. Hence the term Nicene creed. The remaining articles were added at the Second Holy Ecumenical Council in Constantinople in 381 A.D. Nothing has been added or taken away since -- by the Orthodox mind you. The heretical Roman Popes violated the pronouncements of the Holy Ecumenical Council by altering the Creed without the consent of a later Council. Certain Latin Popes sought to UNILATERALLY add what is known as the "filioque" clause. That the Holy Spirt proceeds from the Father (AND THE SON). This was a direct violation of the decisions of the entire Church, guided by the Holy Spirit and set down unanimously by the Holy Fathers of the Second Council. It was decreed by the holy fathers that only another Ecumenical Council could make alterations to the Creed. This was thoroughly accepted by the (Orthodox) Latin Popes for centuries until some of them decided to exalt themselves above Christ and His Church and try to subjugate the entire Church to their rule. This is eventually what led to the Great Schism between the Roman Patriarchs and the Orthodox Church. Rome used to be an honorable and Orthodox Patriarchate. There is nothing inherently evil or bad with the word "Pope". It simply means Papa or father. There have been many Orthodox 'Popes' or Patriarchs of Rome. St. Clement (1st century - contemporary of the Apostles) St. Hippolytus, (first half 3rd century) St. Stephen (mid-3rd century) St. Celestine (first half 5th century) St. Leo (mid 5th century A.D.) St. Gregory the Great, Pope of Rome (590 - 604 A.D.) and many more... It was during the time of St. Photios the Great, recognized and honoured as one of the Three "Pillars of Orthodoxy" in the Orthodox Church, (and greatly hated by the Roman Papists) that Papism as we know it today really began to rear its ugly head. St. Photios went to his repose in the kingdom of God near the end of the 9th century, and he struggled against the Latin heresiarch Pope Nicholas. Now between the the 9th century and the middle of the 11th century, there were some Orthodox Popes who maintained the Orthodox Catholic faith, and some who did not. The severing of the Roman Papacy from Holy Church was a process, not an overnight event. You have to look at individual cases. By 1054 A.D. the Roman Patriarchate was condemned and excommunicated from Holy Church by a council in Constantinople. So there are no Orthodox Popes after 1054 A.D. This is when the Roman pontiffs definitively departed from the Church of Christ and hence the grace of the Holy Spirit departed from them. They have been schismatics and heretics ever since. There have been some notable attempts to reconcile the Latin Papists to the Orthodox Church in the last 1000 years but to no avail, because all these attempts at union were merely for political expediency and were not based upon Papal repentance with a return to an Orthodox confession. All Orthodox Christians MUST adhere to the judgments proclaimed unanimously by the Fathers of the Seven Holy and Great Ecumenical Councils and accepted by the local churches as a whole. The first was in Nicea in 325 A.D. The second was in Constantinople in 381 A.D. The third was in Ephesus in 431 A.D. The fourth was in Chalcedon in 451 A.D. The fifth was in Constantinople in 553 A.D. The sixth was in Constantinople in 680 A.D. The seventh was in Nicea in 787 A.D.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (12916)	10/16/2006 9:33:45 PM
From: Cyprian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

So for a short answer to your question, I have no problem going to a Russian Orthodox Church, a Greek Orthodox Church, a Serbian Orthodox Church, a Palestinian Orthodox Church, or an American Orthodox Church where the Divine liturgy is conducted in English. The only thing that is important is that the Church is Orthodox. I will not pray or worship in a Church that is not Orthodox, period. Even if they call themselves Orthodox. There are many churches who make a pretense of being Orthodox, but in fact do not hold fast to the traditions handed down by the Apostles. It is better to pray privately in your home than to gather around a false bishop or to worship in a false church. Now you will encounter slightly different practices and traditions depending on whether you go to a Russian Orthodox Church or a Greek for instance, but these have nothing to do with the dogmas of the faith. All Orthodox Christians no matter what country they are from confess the Nicene Creed. It's not optional like in Protestantville where you can simply make up your own definition of the faith to please yourself. Most Protestants have not even heard of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. How can they adhere to Apostolic traditions they are completely oblivious to? Roman Catholics are liars, and they will tell you that they too -- as do the Orthodox -- adhere to the Seven Ecumenical Councils, and to tradition. Most people are too lazy or indifferent to even bother to verify if what they say is true. But if you genuinely seek the truth, and measure everything they teach versus the writings of the Fathers they claim to honour and uphold, you will see that they engage in deception. Many if not all the heresies promulgated by the Papists can be refuted directly by the writings of the very fathers they claim as "doctors" of the Church. Take for instance the heretical doctrine of the so-called "Immaculate Conception" of Mary. St. Augustine openly rejects this in his writings. St. Augustine is upheld as one of the greatest doctors of the Roman Catholics. Truly he is an Orthodox saint, not a Roman Catholic saint, no matter what they say. Likewise for St. Patrick. St. Patrick is an Orthodox saint, and not a Roman Catholic saint. St. Gregory the Great, who was Pope of Rome at the end of the 6th century, as in the case of Blessed Augustine is also held in very high esteem by the Papists, harshly condemned the notion that the Church was subject to a single primate or bishop. That is what Papism is. The idea that the Pope is the vicar of Christ on earth and that every member of the Church must be subject to him. Nonsense. Christ's Church has always been conciliar. There is no universal head or Pope on earth that determines the Faith according to his whims. There is a universal head to the Church however, and that is Christ Himself. Now, I am not saying that there is not a hierarchical structure to Christ's Church. There most certainly is. Most everything in Protestantism is simply an irrational reaction to Papism. A common mantra you hear from Protestants is, "I don't have to follow the Pope! Who is he to decide what the whole Church has to believe?" In that sense they are correct. But their solution is just as irrational as Papism. Their solution is to become their own personal Pope, each man deciding whatever suits his own fancy, making up his own idea of religion. More nonsense, which you will never find support for in the Scriptures. The Orthodox Church is hierarchical because that is the way Christ established His Church. Who are we to question how Christ setup His Church? All you have to do is read the New Testament and you will see that there are the offices of bishops, presbyters, and deacons. Most evangelical or so-called non-denominational churches don't even have bishops and priests. Why are these offices established in the Church and testified to in the New Testament and why does St. Paul describe the qualifications for these offices if they are not to be part of Christ's Church? All Orthodox Christians are called to be subject unto their elders, including the priests, bishops, and deacons. However, this is not the same as Papism. Orthodox Christians have an obligation to FLEE their bishop if he (there is no she) preaches heresy. All the holy fathers of the Church taught this, including the holy Apostles. I am not talking about personal sins mind you. We are all great sinners. Orthodox Christians are not to be overly-concerned with the shortcomings and personal sins of their hierarchs. Orthodox Christians ARE supposed to be greatly concerned about the doctrines of the Faith. Heresy is not the same as sin. Sin is transgression of the law. Heresy is defiance against the teachings of the Church. In other words trying to alter the law. Obviously many Orthodox Christians most certainly including myself sin out of ignorance of the teachings of the Church. But if you are aware of an accepted teaching of the Church and you openly preach against it you are committing an act of heresy. If you simply don't accept or wish to innovate and place your judgment against the teachings of the Church you are in heresy. This is why Protestantism is so popular in America. We Americans are selfish. Not much is required of you to be a Protestant. After all, if you listen to the lies of the Protestants you don't need any works to be saved, you just need to draw nigh to God with your lips and say that you have faith. Once saved always saved if you listen to the lies of the Protestants. You can't ever lose salvation, all you had to do was have faith for a split second in time and accept Christ for a brief moment and then it doesn't matter what you do. That is why Protestants always talk about I was saved on such and such a day and date. They boast about how they are saved. Everything is all neatly wrapped up in a box for them. Well, with that attitude what is the incentive to strive to please God? After all you can't lose your salvation, so what is the point of going to so much effort? Orthodoxy requires obedience. It is not like Protestantism which is do-it-yourself Christianity. Orthodox Christians must make sacrifices and endure hardships. However, Orthodox are never to be obedient to heresy. If a bishop in the Orthodox Church openly preaches heresy he should be corrected and if he willfully refuses to conform to the teachings of the Holy Church then he ought to be plucked out. It's even in the canons of the Church that we are worthy of great honor for fleeing bishops in heresy. Orthodox Christians are under no obligation to follow bishops whose teachings openly oppose the Church. The 15th Canon of the First and Second Council under St. Photios the Great sets forth: If any presbyter or bishop or metropolitan dares to secede from communion with his own patriarch and does not mention his name as is ordered and appointed in the divine mystagogy, but before a synodical arraignment and his [the patriarch’s] full condemnation, he creates a schism, the Holy Synod has decreed that this person be alienated from every priestly function, if only he be proven to have transgressed in this. These rules, therefore, have been sealed and ordered concerning those who on the pretext of some accusations against their own presidents [i.e., prelates] stand apart, creating a schism and severing the unity of the Church. But as for those who on account of some heresy condemned by Holy Synods or Fathers sever themselves from communion with their president, that is, because he publicly preaches heresy and with bared head teaches it in the Church, such persons as these not only are not subject to canonical penalty for walling themselves off from communion with the so-called bishop before synodical clarification, but they shall be deemed worthy of due honor among the Orthodox. For not bishops, but false bishops and false teachers have they condemned, and they have not fragmented the Church’s unity with schism, but from schisms and divisions have they earnestly sought to deliver the Church.