That Jesus icon was made by the Emperors in the 3rd century, its a forgery. Read Irenaeus. Icon worship and veneration is Marcellina Gnostic nonsense.
Doh! In my first comment I meant to type 'cruelties and anathemas hurled at Christians who in good conscience COULDN'T revere icons'. I hear there's an anathema against EVEN DOUBTING THE VALIDITY OF ICONS! Oh boy...And I'm not saying the iconoclasts were any better either.
Yeah yeah. I DON'T say orthodox are idolaters as some Protestants offensively do, but just look at the cruelties and anathemas hurled at Christians who in good conscience revere icons (and yeah, the iconoclasts could've done with a bit of tolerance was well!) Thanks for the historical info, though (not sure about Eusebius and his legends as trustworthy history myself, but hey-ho! We'll disagree graciously, unlike Christians in the past!)
GREETING'S TO YOU MY BELOVED BROTHER' IN THE NAME OF THE HOLY TRINITY ONE GOD..AMEN. JUST WANT TO SAY MAY GOD THE FATHER' THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT BLESS YOU AND SHINE HIS LIGHT UPON YOU. TRULY YOUR AN ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO LINK ME AT 917-324-7214 SIMON IS THE NAME. ETHIOPIAN TEWAHEDO ORTHODOX.
A picture is worth a thousand words. Thanks David. I am also reminded that people didn't have Bibles, the press had not been invented, and most people couldn't read. Good job
you shell not carv an image and bow to it, all glory belongs to God only, if we bow or kiss saints we share God's glory with them, and they are just humans like us!!!
Sadly most protestants will just bury their heads in the sand. You can quote them the earliest of the Church fathers and show them the earliest of catacomb icons and they won't listen. It just goes to prove that faith is truly a supernatural gift from God which supersedes human reason and emotions.
Can you please provide your take on the apparent Iconoclasm of King Hezekiah. He smashed the brazen snake of Moses because the people were, appparently, venerating it. Burning incense to it and so on. How is this different to the Orthodox use of icons, which appears to have taken the same turn as the veneration of the brazen snake - at least to a protestant?
nice video, i personally do not have an image of the christ the world give us. jews of then were dark brown maybe black if u want to go there i search and read for the truth not fairy tales
David! "The Icon Not Made With Hands" is the Shroud of Turin! It has not been destroyed and yes, it is an authentic relic. With all of the scientific, archeological, and historical data that has been collected over the centuries concerning the shroud, the only question that remains is whether it was the body of Christ that was wrapped in it. After doing my own research around it and having embraced my Orthodox faith, I believe that it did.
If we don't have a image of Christ, how can you prove he walked on this earth! that means you deny his Incarnation. Say for example, I die, My child asks its Mother, mum! how did daddy look like, how would the mother prove to her child that the father existed on this earth and what he looked liked!
Could you please give me more examples of how Islam became the offshoot of Orthodox Christianity?
The only few historical references available or widely circulated by muslims are that - their Prophet Mohamed's first wife Khadijah cousin was a Christian monk who translated the bible from greek and hebrew to arabic. He taught and had biblical manuscipts of religious texts and scriptures left for his disciple to study which is Mohamed.
@MDIS Islam is not an offshoot of Orthodoxy alone, rather everything that existed in the Arabian peninsula which included Judaism, Christianity, heretical monotheism, Arabian paganism, etc. All of its traditions can be traced to practices that had been around for centuries before Muhammad. Furthermore, most of its extra traditions that aren't specifically canonized in the Qur'an were concocted over the centuries by Muslims who had learned more about biblical traditions (i.e. Hebrew ancestry).
Hi just wanted to say that you can know reality and The (definitive) Truth. How you ask? The Truth is a relative (Our Father Who Art In Heaven, Jesus is The Way THE TRUTH and The Life). That's not you playing God but letting God be God. I feel sometimes people think God is a threat to their reality, and once peoples reality is questioned they become scared. Once you deny the definition of Sin as God defines it you already lost. Sin does not exist out of God's reality.
Jesus is indeed manifested in His glorified body as we speak in heaven. I believe you are reffering to the Holy Spirit that Glorifies The Son in The Word of God (Bible)
@HairyBeardedFur 1. Right, but he is also in heaven and not here currently in physical form. 2. The reference was particularly in regards to the saints. 3. Of course, that is a distortion of the intended meaning of that verse to use it in this context.
very well said. when I was in my anti-catholic phase, I also grossly misunderstood the whole iconography issue. this video does a great service in helping people get a proper perspective on it.
You were right about the natural tendency to have idols. So many times when I was trying to come back to Christ, after going into pagan religions, an idol of a pagan god, or even a buddha would always tempt me to turn away from Jesus. I don't know that I'd use the Jews who rejected Christ at the time as an example to promote icons, but it is interesting nonetheless. Thank you for the video. I'll show it to others.
...public exhortation. The latter are not performed by all, but is related to prophecy (which is why the proper custom with that should be a person speaks in tongues, and a person with the gift of interpretation 'translates' for the believers). This is why Paul, in referring to the problem that was plaguing the Corinthian church says "If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God." (14:28) But you do not deny a gift wholesale due to a few...
Let me clear again. I do not reject the gift of speaking in tongues. I reject false interpretations of it. Most people can not interpret the delusions in their own mind, let alone the delusions coming from others.
Wanting to interpret the "secret" meaning of tongues, or Revelation or Daniel, or some type of "mystery" keeps people away from the real purpose which is LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR.
Focus on that. Nothing else is important. Seriously
Being able to speak in tongues all of a sudden means you cannot love? That is absurd. Why should they be mutually exclusive? Because you said so?
You haven't stated why speaking in tongues suddenly means that a person "is not focused" on loving his or her neighbor. Please explain why, because it makes no sense.
Once again - if you have no love, it doesn't matter if you speak in tongues. (focus, this is for you) if you have love YOU WON'T CARE if you speak in tongues.
Get it? neither altogether useless, nor very profitable.
The filioque is, in my mind, without a double the number one heresy. It dismantles the Godhead.
I never said reason and faith collide. I said that in the West faith is subservient to reason. Christianity is not built on seeking reason. It is built on seeking God and FAITH
You're speaking about tongues and love as if they're somehow separate. What exactly is your point here? What use is the Eucharist, according to your logic, if there is no love? The whole point of that chapter is that love is absolute and it conquers all things. Your comments don't prove anything concerning tongues. You have not refuted them by any means. You're just endlessly attacking a straw man.
Your stupidity is persistent. Has not God broken the head of the leviathan and given it as food to the Ethiopians? The young lions roar after their prey, and seek their meat from God.
How much must be revealed to you that you will be satiated? Do not be double-minded. Why do you speak of things from above when you are from below?
Why do you speak of virtues when your passions rule you? You do not understand because I speak not of tongues but of you.
Is it not enough for you to struggle with loving your neighbor? Have you already mastered your passions that you seek to understand the virtues? Do not be double-minded.
God drew up His people out from their slave masters in Egypt and rained manna down on them from heaven, gave them food of the angels to their full.
But our fathers would not obey, but rejected, and turned their hearts back to Egypt.
@DopoNotte Yes and just look at the american dollar and the egyptian pyramid on it, it is just way to obvious that satan is running everything here and we have completely rejected the Laws of Yahweh to follow the gentile religion and you should know that if you are a gentile you are an un believer of Yahweh as this is what gentile means. Do not be decieved throw our anything written by the false apostle and read the true gospel spoken by The Messiah who was sent by Yahweh. satan used paul
Why don't you try reading what Yahshua came to tell us, it is written in the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew's gospel account of Yahshua's walk here is Yahweh's gift and Paul is for those who reject Yahshua's word. Yahshua came to tell us to follow the commandments to death like he did, we must strive with every fiber of our being to hold the Ten commandments as the top of our lives above all else. Even if it means everyone hates you or tries to kill you, seek first the kingdom of Yahweh above all.
@DopoNotte I believe what the spirit has taught me,and Yahshua told us in the gospel, that I must strive with every fiber of my being to not break Yahwehs Laws after I have repented and Yahweh has showed me all my sins, lest I should fall from what I have gained. He is just and Faithful to help those who repent and cry out to understand his true message. Only when we are willing to give up this dark world will we finally see the light and he will then come to us and guide us with his Love.
You have shown your ignorance. For did you not know you were quoting Paul when using the word gospel? After all Paul is the first to use "evangellion" meaning "good news," and his disciple, Mark, used the phrase in terms of "story of Jesus." Luke, also a disciple of Paul, copied Mark, as did Matthew and John.
@DopoNotte Matthew walked with Yahshua and if you know the word of Yahweh from the tanack you would know he does not tolerate sin.
By saying I am ignorant you directly break the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself as I never insulted anyone. If a man still has a conscience it will convict the heart and it will know.
Passions?
Why does anyone need Paul if they already have Yahshua who was sent by Yahweh to tell us to follow the ten??
@DopoNotte you have babbled on but do not even know the old scriptures where Yahweh makes known how he feels about us and what he has in store for us? If you really want to know your Father go and learn of him and then what Yahshua says will make sense. He even tells us we will reject him and follow another who comes in his own name?
You are a hypocrite because yourself to a different standard than you do your neighbor. Oh oh oh! But you're telling the truth and spreading the good news! So its okay for you to act however you want.
Listen, I don't care about your diatribe. If you got a problem with Orthodoxy take it up with your Yahweh.
@DopoNotte Very good brother, I shall and i shall pray for your forgiveness for blaspheming Yahweh your creator. I pray for all men to see the simple beautiful truth of the Ten commandments and how light indeed the yoke is once we accept it and yes this includes Sabbath on the 7th day. Please try to sit down and just see there is no need for Paul, he is the test to see if we believe Yahshua's words. See Deuteronomy 13, Deuteronomy is the book of the Law and in Deut 5 we see the commandments
@DopoNotte I am not part of any church or organization. I am simply a servant of my King Yahshua and El Shaddai(God almighty). I am instructed and lead by the Spirit of Truth on the Ten commandments, the words of Moses, The Prophets and Yahshua the first son of Yahweh. I am of The Nation created for Yahshua, the followers of their Father. I am a man just like everyone else and know what Yahweh wants from us. He loves us all but by our own freewill, we must be saved. Yahweh said to listen!
Moreover what part of "He is just and Faithful to help those who repent and cry out to understand his true message. Only when we are willing to give up this dark world will we finally see the light and he will then come to us and guide us with his Love,".. does Orthodoxy not teach?
@DopoNotte Brother please see that all these idols and man made saints are breaking the commandment, do not make idols. Is this not what he said? Why is it ok for the orthodox church to do what he said not to do? Please see I am not talking in anger but through love as I have been humbled by knowlege from El Shaddai and I am just a simple man who never went to church for the last 25 years. I was taught through the Holy Spirit of Truth recieved through repentance. Yahshua will save who listens
@DopoNotte I did many things before repenting but have been shown how to live in truth. It is hard to give up the world and dreams of being known here and it is admittedly hard to throw out lusts. For instance adultery, looking at other women is easy to give up once you see them as your brothers and sisters. It is easy to give up eandeavors for wealth once we see we do not need them and Yahweh will provide for his children. There is no more worry with Yahweh. I share out of love for my brethren
Just look and see how mighty Yahweh is and in his mercy he even gave us ten fingers and ten toes so when we hold out our hands we remember his mighty Laws and when we look down we are again reminded of his Ten Laws. The Laws are good and righteous and are there to follow and not to just use as a loose kind of way of life, so you can say oops \i broke one but Paul said it's ok cause I am already forgiven. Gouge out your eye rather than sin, is that not serious enough a warning for Mankind??
The world seems to have thrown out every word Yahshua spoke from Yahweh and has decided they like Pauls no punishment gospel lie!!! We reject the word of Yahweh for man made traditions just like the Pharisees did when Yahshua came to show them what they were doing wrong.
you repeat to the world the words of satan spoken through the false apostle who leads the world to sin. Paul prophesied about himself when he spoke of the man of sin!!!
And what does our Lord and Savior say about prayer, fasting and vigil? Do not be like the hypocrites! If you fast, you will harm your spirits, and if you pray you will bring condemnation upon yourself.
Yet Rejoice! And be exceeding glad! For if you heed what poor Stephen says you will learn to judge yourself, thus you will be chastened by the Lord, that you will not be condemned with the world.
@DopoNotte Matthew6:5 When you pray, dont be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get. 6 But when you pray, go away by yourself, shut the door behind you, and pray to your Father in private. Then your Father, who sees everything, will reward you.
@DopoNotte Well put mate couldnt agree with you more. I personally found the Jesus Prayer much more spiritually fulfilling than speaking in tongues but God blesses people where they are at
Tongues only cause confusion when people abuse them. But you cannot forbid them because they can be abused. That's like saying icons should be forbidden because some people exaggerate their devotion to them.
...those who speak in tongues "utter mysteries with their spirits." Tongues are clearly something untintelligible (otherwise why would you need interpretation?). And Paul also clearly distinguishes the private tongues for personal edification with public tongues, which must be interpreted in order to edify the church. Paul's criticisms in 1 Cor. 14 was not against tongues in general, but against its abuse. But he certainly confirmed tongues as charismatics advocate today.
You say tongues are unintelligible for which you need interpretation; yet do you not view the Scriptures in the same light?
Did you not know you too need a guide to help you understand the Scriptures? Yet are these not said plainly that babes 7 days old may understand the ways of life and live?
As long as you follow that cesspool of heresy, Aquinas, you will fail to interpret Scripture.
Who says that I think that Scripture does not need interpretation? I think I've made it clear enough in the past that I do not stand by the Evangelical concept that "Scripture interprets Scripture."
As for Aquinas - wouldn't it be more efficacious, both for you and for myself, that you say why he's wrong instead of just attacking him a a "cesspool of heresy"?
Aquinas said, paraphrased, "faith takes over when reason has hit its limit." This is absolutely absurd. Aquinas is basically saying that faith is subservient to reason.
This is continued in the Catholic catechism and by former popes where they say that reason is a large factor for the faith.
Reason has almost nothing to do with Christianity. Nor is it superior to faith.
Christianity is built on seeking reason. That's why it was so influenced by Greek and Roman philosophy in the early days. That's indeed why it was so successful in spreading throughout the Roman Empire. Hellenophile Christianity based on reason is what Christianity cherishes. in Acts 17:11, when the Bereans were called nobler for researching the scriptures, would you call that faith?
What type of faith do you have if you explain everything away with reason?
What kind of faith do you have if you understand everything?
The answer is none! If you already understand everything and can reason through everything, you don't have an organic living faith! We aren't called to explain everything or to reason through it.
Have you actually read the definitions of "faith" and of "reason"? Because you state that having faith is "letting go of reason." Why that is preposterous!
Would you believe in Muhammad if a Muslim came to you and said "Jesus is not God," and you said "Why on Earth should I believe you?" while he replied "Oh, faith." You don't believe things blindly, do you?
Where exactly has it occurred that Aquinas conclusions on the Trinity have been so strayed from "faith" as you put it?
If you A: believe the filioque and B: focus on reason as a means of understanding the Scriptures, then you will fundamentally misunderstand the fullness there of.
This is why I rightly say Aquinas is your Scriptures guide.
Even though you do not look to him regarding 1Cor14:1-3, you still try to REASON through the passages, instead of looking at 1Cor13:8 and realizing what is more profitable - to LOVE. If you love, you wouldn't care to speak in tongues or if others did it. Bottom line.
Again you speak as if the gifts of the Holy Spirit and love are somehow irreconcilable, but that is not true.
Additionally, Aquinas' conclusions on the filioque are straight from the early Church. It's not like he filioque magically appeared in people's minds. It was approved separately, granted, but it was argued long before the Council of Toledo.
BTW - do you have the context of John Chrysostom's comments on tongues?
@Reazzurro90 Isaiah29: 13 And so the Lord says, These people say they are mine. They honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. And their worship of me is nothing but man-made rules learned by rote.[a] 14 Because of this, I will once again astound these hypocrites with amazing wonders. The wisdom of the wise will pass away, and the intelligence of the intelligent will disappear.
You will all learn the truth of Yahshua's true gospel Matt
And I also have two other questions: 1.) what is the difference between God's uncreated energies and the Holy Spirit is, and 2.) what the difference between begetting and proceeding is. Sorry if I sound accusatory.
Palamite theology isn't my strong point, but I'll do my best.
1. There is no different between God's uncreated energies and the Holy Spirit. "Uncreated" means that it is actually God, as God is the only uncreated. God's grace is God's presence, the Holy Spirit.
2. begetting is a term used only in reference to parents and their children -- it refers to a special kind of relationship. Proceeding means "to go forth from, emanate or issue from"
You are right that God's Energies are in deed God. As created beings we participate in His Energies, what the West knows as Grace, but we can never know His Essence.
The Energies of God are not the Holy Spirit, at least not anymore than the Energies of God are Jesus Christ, or are the Father.
To say that the Holy Spirit is the Energies might lead some to believe that the Spirit is the Grace of God. This is not true. The Spirit is One of the Trinity, wholly Divine.
Ah I just replied to David and should have replied to you.
The distinction you seek is the difference between God's Energies and God's Essence. As created beings we participate in Gods Energies; His Essence will forever remain unknowable to us. This is how it is written "No one has seen God at anytime," yet Jesus says "I pray that they may know thee."
Essence and Energies. The Holy Spirit is One Personhood of the Trinity.
A good way to understand Essence and Energies is this. Try to describe your friend to me. You may describe his hair color, how tall he is, eye color, if he's nice, what he wears, what he likes to do, etc etc. But what are you really describing?
You're describing how he operates in the world around him - in other words his energies. Similarly we can not possibly describe Gods Essence; simply how God works.
I think to equate Energies w/ the Holy Spirit is wrong though.
The reason I think this is because the Father is God, the Son is God, the Spirit is God. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, the Spirit is not the Father.
They are all uncreated, co-eternal, and put forth Grace; but they are not each other. "Unity in Essence, diversity in Personhood," St. Gregory Nanzianzus.
The best way I've ever heard of it is relating it to water. Water comes in three forms - Ice, Water, and Vapor. All are different from one another, each have some properties that distinguishes them, yet all three are united in substance. No one would say that ice is not water, for instance.
You must be careful with this one. What you are describing actually lends itself to modalistic monarchianism (what modern Oneness Pentecostals hold to) which states God is in different "modes" at different points. The reason this example doesn't work is because God is simultaneously Father, Son and Holy Spirit and water is not simultaneously gas, solid, and liquid. Imaging the Trinity in a concrete fashion seems to never work too well.
Well water exists simultaneously as liquid, solid, and gas, which would, in my opinion, point to a Trinity. I think what you're saying is a fair point, but if we are precise about it, it will work.
The conception of the light bulb (my father made that up) is good too. A light bulb contains light, but from it proceed heat and sound as well.
I would still say these go too far. The light bulb one is a new one (and pretty good) but it's hard for me to imagine how the light heat and sound are of the same essence (the light bulb itself?). With the water example you could still separate the solid from the liquid and gas (etc) and God is indivisible. I'm weary of these because they attempt to do what the west has historically done (treat the doctrine as some sort of mathematical equation). It's best to remain a mystery.
I'd also say it seems to cause some issues with our view on Holy Mysteries... We shouldn't believe something ONLY if we can have a concrete understanding of everything involved.
Is modalism, by the way, still popular among Oneness Pentecostals? I thought they had given that up for the "Jesus Only" perspective, that God = Jesus, plain and simple, and that Holy Spirit and Father are but titles.
You know, it depends on who you talk to.. usually they deny any charge you bring (modalism - "jesus only" etc). That's why I said monarchianism (patripassionism). They basically believe Jesus IS the Father AND the Holy Spirit and they're titles but that He (God) was operating in different 'modes' at different times. Basically from this you could say that the Father died on the cross (as Jesus) and then became the Holy Spirit. It's full of contradictions... regardless of what they call(cont)
Basically every large protestant denomination, ie Lutheran, Calvinist, Methodist, Mormon, Pentecostal, Baptist, JW, Jews for Jesus, 7DA, etc revolves around some form of heresy.
I remember my Catechism teacher telling me that Pentecostals are X heresy, Calvinists are Y heresy etc. I don't remember which ones belong to which group; but you see the point I'm getting at right?
The Church has already fought against these heresies in the first 500 centuries.
I don't think it's fair to lump Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses in with Protestants. They're Restorationists, and have nothing in common with Protestants (they're not even Christians). I think to a large extent what you say is true though. Mormonism was addressed from the very beginning, and JW are Arians, essentially.
Orthodoxy is great. But I still cannot accept its rejection of the charismatic movement as well as its rejection of the filioque. Thomas Aquinas convinced me on the latter.
The charismatic movement is A: not biblical, and B: not Orthodox.
This is because the Holy Spirit, the heavenly King, the comforter, the Spirit of truth, who art present everywhere and fillest all things, the treasure of every good and giver of life.....
REMOVES confusion, doesn't ADD it.
People "speaking in tongues" is not the same as Pentecost when everyone understood everyone else language that they could understand the Gospel.
Not Orthodox but it is orthodox and it is biblical. The tongues spoken at Pentecost were both understood tongues and were also not understood. How were they also not understood? Because only people who understood the languages being spoken responded. The rest laughed it off as drunk men at 9 AM.
In the other instances of Acts, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the converts, they immediately began speaking in tongues. You say it's not the same, but Paul in 1 Corinthians 14 claims that....
Why do you quote 1Cor14:1-3 as though you have understood 1Cor13:8 ?
1Cor 12:10, 28, 13:4, 11, 14, are all incredibly important to understanding the validity of 14:1-3.
The charismatic movement, as it exists especially in America today, is not biblical. I will follow St. John Chrysostom when he says about speaking in tongues "neither altogether useless, nor very profitable."
1 Cor. 13:8 refers to the all-conquering power of love, not the the ceasing of the gifts. It speaks of how love is essential in all that we do. With regards to the rest of your verses, there is nothing that contradicts the charismatic message.
You see, you make the mistake, as of several others, of lumping tongues entirely together. But that's not the case. There are two types of tongues - the private prayer tongues (which all receive upon being filled by the Spirit), and the tongues for....
As I stated "why do you quote 1Cor14:1-3 as though you understand 1Cor13:8?"
Let me be more clear. If you do not have love, your ability to speak in tongues is meaningless. If you have love, you won't care to speak in tongues; 1Cor12:10, 28, show not everyone have the same gifts. Yet you say it has nothing to do with it?
This only proves my over arching point - what matters is who your guide is for interpreting Scriptures! Clearly Aquinas isn't cutting it
I referred to Aquinas only with regards to the filioque. I do not recall Aquinas saying anything concerning that passage in Corinthians.
Regardless I still don't see where the alleged contradiction or fallacy is with regards to 1 Cor. 13:8. It is merely referring to that when Christ comes, all the gifts will cease to function, but love itself will remain forever. That does not diminish the importance of the gifts.
It's a distortion of the meaning of the text to use the Scriptural passage stating that Christ is the only mediator/intercessor between God and man to disparage icons or the intercession of the saints. If we interpret that passage this way, we also have to reject the notion that Christians should pray for one another -- thereby acting as intercessors and mediators. The meaning of the text is that only Christ reconciles God and man -- through the Incarnation, in which God became man.
Not that I'm claiming that icons are necessarily idolatrous, but I do not understand how to reconcile those two premises. Also, I have no problem revering Holy Images like the ones which were made in the Temple, provided it is done symbolically, but I have heard claims that God's uncreated grace resides in icons, that they work miracles, "whoever honors the image honors the prototype," and that icons are "windows to heaven" and "bring us to the Father" --
1. God's grace can and is indeed conferred through icons. It's not that icons inherently possess grace, but that God confers the grace through matter (which has been redeemed) to the worshiper. Rather than saying grace "resides" in icons, I think better terminology might be that God's grace can be passed through icons.
2. Not all icons work miracles -- there are several though, that have. Again, God's grace working through the icon -- not some
3. Yes, we believe that when we kiss an icon or bow before it, we are kissing or bowing to the person depicted, not a piece of wood -- so the honored paid to the image can be said to pass to the prototype.
4. We call them "windows to heaven" because they visually depict the unseen "great cloud of witnesses" surrounding us during worship.
5. They "bring us to the Father" insofar as anything else used in the worship of the Father does.
How can you affirm the use of icons of Christ without falling into Nestorianism? You end up saying that the icon ONLY depicts Christ's humanity, but since the Council of Chalcedon affirmed that his two natures are united "without division, separation, or confusion," wouldn't that make it impossible to depict Christ's humanity without also claiming to depict his divine essence -- which would be idolatry?
As you yourself quote the Council of Chalcedon as saying, Christ's humanity and divinity are "without...separation." They are inseparable. Where one is present, the other is also. If I took a photograph of you, would you say that it was not a picture of you because it can't capture your thoughts and your soul as well? Of course not-- it's you.
Ironically, the Nestorian (Assyrian) Church doesn't use icons anymore -- they gave them up in the early modern period due to Islamic influence.
As usual, well put together and informative video.
I still remember learning in an Arts and Architectural History class in college that the tell-tale sign of an Orthodox Church is the iconostasis, because no other church (Christian or otherwise) has them. They are truly beautiful.
I also remember learning about the whitewashing of the Haggia Sophia and other jewels of Eastern Christendom, such a shame. The Muslims are so full of zeal, and yet so lacking of truth, may God open their eyes soon.
As much as some Orthodox still have hard feelings about the Roman Catholics plundering Constantinople in 1204 (as well as many places in the Holy Land during other Crusades), I've sometimes wondered if that wasn't God's way of preserving the heritage of the Byzantine Empire and its Church -- the RCs stole them and display them now in their own churches; the Muslims would have simply destroyed them. I think the latter fate is much worse than the former.
@davidpwithun Thought this was a good time to interject...
Regardless of this troll, I wanted to let you know that your videos are amazing. As an Orthodox catechumen coming in during Pascha who is interested in philosophy and theology (and most likely seminary) I find it sad that we lack any real english apologetics. Keep up the great work... it's necessary.
I am struck by your comments and feel a need to reply. You are yet to be Orthodox, correct? Yet you say you most likely want to enter seminary. This is dangerous.
Converts have an extreme zeal and passion (I use this word on purpose) during the immediately time up to and for years even after their conversion. They want to rush out into the desert and be like the greatest saints. Trust me, I had this feeling too.
This zeal needs to be tempered with the patience of the cradles
In my parish there are three wonderful Arabic families and I have gravitated towards the matriarch of one of the families and I listen to her a lot. I dare not utter a word in her presence. I have so much to learn.
This is my suggestion for you, that you find someone in your parish from which to learn. The journey is just beginning! You have not yet begun to partake in the struggle.
This is similar answer to why Orthodoxy does not have "apologetics" per se in the Western sense. And what need do we have for them?
We know we're the truth; we don't need to debate anyone about it. Are we really going to bring people into the faith because we "won" a "debate" ? Did Jesus teach us to bring in converts by debating the Scriptures?
Save yourself, and a thousand around you shall be saved/; St. Seraphim of Sarov.
Plus we are the only faith that has true evangelists; our monastics, who deeply love the world that they give up their lives in order to prayer for and for the betterment of the world.
We also have the liturgy. Divine Liturgy is the ultimate form of evangelism, for it is an active participation in coming to God!
These are two of the greatest forms of evangelism; and neither is pathetic apologetics. Focus on the struggle of these two.
As Fr. Lazarus, the spiritual leader of St. Antony's monastery in Egypt, states "One hour of prayer mindful of God, is better than a lifetime of beneficient service."
Focus on what St. Theophan the Recluse says, prayer of mind in the heart. Nous, and Kardia. Focus on the struggle of the Jesus Prayer; focus on the struggle of this asceticism.
I know you are burning to do a lot right now and want to take it all on all at once. But trust me, the Jesus prayer is enough for now
I have been looking into Orthodoxy for well over a year now and I've discussed many of these things with my spiritual Fr (who is very good at making me patient). I look up to many in the parish and consider my spiritual father and our sub deacon to be mentors. I'm aware that you don't convert and become a seminarian the next day (why would you do that in any tradition?) and I have a long way to go to finish my undergraduate schooling anyways.. (cont)
I honestly appreciate you giving me advice, but some of the things you've said are reasons I still have second thoughts about orthodoxy. Not because of the content but because of the differing approaches. Western Orthodoxy absolutely needs apologetics and I'm not sure why there is such a knee jerk reaction to it. Orthodoxwiki talks about how necessary it is and gives examples of past orthodox apologists. While I have the utmost respect and humility towards monastics it seems like (cont)
...a huge stretch to call them the 'only true evangelist.'
I appreciate that your views are (generally) orthodox but these things worry me because it seems like they are taken to the extreme.
We are told to be prepared to give defense for what we believe by St Peter and I can't possibly imagine how this could be wrong. "Winning a debate" is was helped me remain a Christian theist.
What is Western Orthodoxy? Do you mean Western Rite? Last time I checked there is simply Orthodoxy; not regions of it. Please explain what you mean.
We are told to be prepared to give "defense." Defense is the operative word. Stephen, my patron, only gave his account after he was summoned. James was only martyred after he gave his account.
We give a defense of our faith when it is required of us.
A year is not a long period of time. I know to a undergrad a year seems like a long
... time but it's not. You're so young and vigorous. I too was that way. I'm trying to help you not make the same mistakes I made.
I am curious about your comments regarding you Sp. Fr. Is he your Fr. Confessor, and more importantly is he your priest?
Monastics are true evangelists; always have been, always will be; so also is the Liturgy. I know a convert whose priest told him for 3 years after his conversion to read nothing about the faith except the Divine Liturgy.
What do you mean by "[my{ views are (generally) Orthodox" ?? That is hilarious! Is a catechumin really going to tell an Orthodox that his views are not Orthodox? And yet you say you have humility? I think my point is being proven. But I'll let you explain what you mean.
What is being extreme is saying that after a year of looking into Orthodoxy you already have ideas of wanting to be a priest. That is extreme. I'm simply trying to bring you back to reality.
Only after you've become illumined, many months, sometimes years, does the struggle begin! When you are given a prayer rule, and you start finding it difficult to keep it, then you will understand how much of a struggle it is!
Every convert thinks Orthodoxy needs apologetics. I thought so too and we think we're gonna help defend the faith by doing it!
Pride is a terrible passion
And if you currently don't have any problems when praying... you haven't really begun to pray yet!
This is exactly what I'm talking about... I wasn't telling you I've looked into Orthodox for a year to "flash my credentials" but to let you know about myself. I'm a quasi-philosopher interested in theology who has done my research.
By 'western Orthodoxy' I meant Orthodoxy in western countries. In these countries Christianity is being constantly attacked and ridiculed and I find that worthy of defense.
Changing from apologia (defense) to 'defense' doesn't change the meaning.
Orthodoxy is not a philosophy; it is not a theology; it is not even a religion. Orthodoxy is the Life of the World. In it is the end of all occult like rituals, and the end of religion. Fr. Schmemann states this clearly in "For the Life of the World"
The hierarchs, the saints and the Church who combat heresy. The Church which you aren't even officially apart of yet. Thinking the Church needs your help to combat heresy is pride.
During Orthros we read Psalm 50, of which verses 13-15 are very clear. When God has bestowed His Holy Spirit on us, then we shall teach transgressors His ways.
Also look to Phillipians 2:12' work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
There is no knee jerk reaction. I am simply calling your statements for what they are.
Slow down, do not rush in; this is a marathon not a sprint.
I understand that, and appreciate your insight. I'm trying to point out to you that you are being irrational. I don't think orthodoxy NEEDS ME to defend it or Christianity. I think we're all called to.This non-confrontational view of evangelism seems to be lacking for today.
I would take it as an insult if I were the video poster, but low and behold you're up in other comments telling him how YOUR AN APOLOGIST TO YOUR FAMILY!!!!
My personal issues regarding how my family views my conversion to Orthodoxy has little to do with me "witnessing" the faith, or "apologetics" as you say.
If they ask me questions, i will answer. It is wrong however, and most definitely NOT Orthodox, to approach those who are not Orthodox and demean them by saying they're wrong and their theology is wrong etc
That is not Orthodoxy. We live our faith in the face of the world; for the life of the world. And we witness when it is required of us
That Syria church is a Gnostic church!
pandirasbox 5 days ago
Icons were not used on altars nor in worship. They were used on tombs, and those were typological images.
pandirasbox 5 days ago
That Jesus icon was made by the Emperors in the 3rd century, its a forgery. Read Irenaeus. Icon worship and veneration is Marcellina Gnostic nonsense.
pandirasbox 5 days ago
Yea, the 6th century Christians used icons
pandirasbox 5 days ago
Doh! In my first comment I meant to type 'cruelties and anathemas hurled at Christians who in good conscience COULDN'T revere icons'. I hear there's an anathema against EVEN DOUBTING THE VALIDITY OF ICONS! Oh boy...And I'm not saying the iconoclasts were any better either.
MrDoremouse 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from davidpwithun
Saint Irene had her son's eyes gouged out! Love your enemies ,eh? Is THIS what Christ came down to earth to create?
MrDoremouse 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from davidpwithun
Yeah yeah. I DON'T say orthodox are idolaters as some Protestants offensively do, but just look at the cruelties and anathemas hurled at Christians who in good conscience revere icons (and yeah, the iconoclasts could've done with a bit of tolerance was well!) Thanks for the historical info, though (not sure about Eusebius and his legends as trustworthy history myself, but hey-ho! We'll disagree graciously, unlike Christians in the past!)
MrDoremouse 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from davidpwithun
GREETING'S TO YOU MY BELOVED BROTHER' IN THE NAME OF THE HOLY TRINITY ONE GOD..AMEN. JUST WANT TO SAY MAY GOD THE FATHER' THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT BLESS YOU AND SHINE HIS LIGHT UPON YOU. TRULY YOUR AN ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO LINK ME AT 917-324-7214 SIMON IS THE NAME. ETHIOPIAN TEWAHEDO ORTHODOX.
Oneamlak 1 month ago
A picture is worth a thousand words. Thanks David. I am also reminded that people didn't have Bibles, the press had not been invented, and most people couldn't read. Good job
pdxcalibur 3 months ago in playlist Orthodoxy Withun
it says in the bible that jesus had bronze skin and hair of wool so why do you pretend like he was white... ? are you guys just THAT racist...
alysiamonet 4 months ago
@alysiamonet you see thats shit
MrBlackman504 2 months ago
you shell not carv an image and bow to it, all glory belongs to God only, if we bow or kiss saints we share God's glory with them, and they are just humans like us!!!
irinar73 4 months ago
Fav'd/Liked. Awesome video.
Sadly most protestants will just bury their heads in the sand. You can quote them the earliest of the Church fathers and show them the earliest of catacomb icons and they won't listen. It just goes to prove that faith is truly a supernatural gift from God which supersedes human reason and emotions.
HetmanWojtek 5 months ago
Can you please provide your take on the apparent Iconoclasm of King Hezekiah. He smashed the brazen snake of Moses because the people were, appparently, venerating it. Burning incense to it and so on. How is this different to the Orthodox use of icons, which appears to have taken the same turn as the veneration of the brazen snake - at least to a protestant?
brendos444 5 months ago
the the relic of him is bull dont believe the hype
Getmusclequick 5 months ago
nice video, i personally do not have an image of the christ the world give us. jews of then were dark brown maybe black if u want to go there i search and read for the truth not fairy tales
Getmusclequick 5 months ago
David! "The Icon Not Made With Hands" is the Shroud of Turin! It has not been destroyed and yes, it is an authentic relic. With all of the scientific, archeological, and historical data that has been collected over the centuries concerning the shroud, the only question that remains is whether it was the body of Christ that was wrapped in it. After doing my own research around it and having embraced my Orthodox faith, I believe that it did.
ManOnFia 8 months ago
If we don't have a image of Christ, how can you prove he walked on this earth! that means you deny his Incarnation. Say for example, I die, My child asks its Mother, mum! how did daddy look like, how would the mother prove to her child that the father existed on this earth and what he looked liked!
OrthodoxSoldierICXC 9 months ago
THANKS
JokersKush 1 year ago
St. Luke also carved a small statue of the Blessed Mother holding the Christ child. From what I understand it is located in Guadalupe, Spain.
+++
alms. fasting. prayer.
ammazzamoro 1 year ago
Don't forget the Icons depicted on the walls of the catacombs which date from the first hundred years of Christianity.
MrOphachew 1 year ago
Very nice presentation of the history of icons in the Orthodox Church. You covered all the bases regarding the historical development. Very nice. :)
neildingman 1 year ago
Good job brother.
thepraying 1 year ago
Hi ,
Could you please give me more examples of how Islam became the offshoot of Orthodox Christianity?
The only few historical references available or widely circulated by muslims are that - their Prophet Mohamed's first wife Khadijah cousin was a Christian monk who translated the bible from greek and hebrew to arabic. He taught and had biblical manuscipts of religious texts and scriptures left for his disciple to study which is Mohamed.
And Mohamed did travel throughout Christiandom.
MDIS 1 year ago
@MDIS Islam is not an offshoot of Orthodoxy alone, rather everything that existed in the Arabian peninsula which included Judaism, Christianity, heretical monotheism, Arabian paganism, etc. All of its traditions can be traced to practices that had been around for centuries before Muhammad. Furthermore, most of its extra traditions that aren't specifically canonized in the Qur'an were concocted over the centuries by Muslims who had learned more about biblical traditions (i.e. Hebrew ancestry).
ManOnFia 8 months ago
Hi just wanted to say that you can know reality and The (definitive) Truth. How you ask? The Truth is a relative (Our Father Who Art In Heaven, Jesus is The Way THE TRUTH and The Life). That's not you playing God but letting God be God. I feel sometimes people think God is a threat to their reality, and once peoples reality is questioned they become scared. Once you deny the definition of Sin as God defines it you already lost. Sin does not exist out of God's reality.
HairyBeardedFur 1 year ago
Jesus is indeed manifested in His glorified body as we speak in heaven. I believe you are reffering to the Holy Spirit that Glorifies The Son in The Word of God (Bible)
HairyBeardedFur 1 year ago
your right about the picture of someone you loved that passed away, but Jesus is not dead, but risen and coming back. We walk by faith not sight.
HairyBeardedFur 1 year ago
@HairyBeardedFur 1. Right, but he is also in heaven and not here currently in physical form. 2. The reference was particularly in regards to the saints. 3. Of course, that is a distortion of the intended meaning of that verse to use it in this context.
davidpwithun 1 year ago
@HairyBeardedFur Տէր Յիսուս Քրիստոս Որդի Աստուծոյ ողորմեա ինձ մեղաւորիս
უფალო იესუ ქრისტე, ძეო ღმრთისაო, შემიწყალე მე ცოდვილი.
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱέ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν
Domine Iesu Christe, Fili Dei, miserere mei, peccatoris.
Doamne Iisuse Hristoase, Fiul lui Dumnezeu, miluieşte-mă pe mine păcătosul
主耶穌基督，上帝之子，憐憫我罪人。
Uram Jézus Krisztus, Isten Fia, könyörülj rajtam, bűnösön!
أيها الرب يسوع المسيح ابن الله, إرحمني أنا الخاطئ
TheMistAnchorite 2 months ago
very well said. when I was in my anti-catholic phase, I also grossly misunderstood the whole iconography issue. this video does a great service in helping people get a proper perspective on it.
Pacisdiligo 1 year ago
EXCELENT BROTHER KEEP IT UP ...
tariqmartin2007 1 year ago
Thanks for the video I sure did learn something! :)
HyperNessie 1 year ago
very good brother :)
god bless your work
BakinKoljac 1 year ago
You were right about the natural tendency to have idols. So many times when I was trying to come back to Christ, after going into pagan religions, an idol of a pagan god, or even a buddha would always tempt me to turn away from Jesus. I don't know that I'd use the Jews who rejected Christ at the time as an example to promote icons, but it is interesting nonetheless. Thank you for the video. I'll show it to others.
FightingOne1 2 years ago
...abusers. Would you reject the Eucharist, with that kind of argument, since the Corinthians were rather fond of that as well?
NO!
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
...public exhortation. The latter are not performed by all, but is related to prophecy (which is why the proper custom with that should be a person speaks in tongues, and a person with the gift of interpretation 'translates' for the believers). This is why Paul, in referring to the problem that was plaguing the Corinthian church says "If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God." (14:28) But you do not deny a gift wholesale due to a few...
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Let me clear again. I do not reject the gift of speaking in tongues. I reject false interpretations of it. Most people can not interpret the delusions in their own mind, let alone the delusions coming from others.
Wanting to interpret the "secret" meaning of tongues, or Revelation or Daniel, or some type of "mystery" keeps people away from the real purpose which is LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR.
Focus on that. Nothing else is important. Seriously
DopoNotte 2 years ago
I have no idea what you're talking about.
Being able to speak in tongues all of a sudden means you cannot love? That is absurd. Why should they be mutually exclusive? Because you said so?
You haven't stated why speaking in tongues suddenly means that a person "is not focused" on loving his or her neighbor. Please explain why, because it makes no sense.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Once again - if you have no love, it doesn't matter if you speak in tongues. (focus, this is for you) if you have love YOU WON'T CARE if you speak in tongues.
Get it? neither altogether useless, nor very profitable.
The filioque is, in my mind, without a double the number one heresy. It dismantles the Godhead.
I never said reason and faith collide. I said that in the West faith is subservient to reason. Christianity is not built on seeking reason. It is built on seeking God and FAITH
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Again, you're talking nonsense.
You're speaking about tongues and love as if they're somehow separate. What exactly is your point here? What use is the Eucharist, according to your logic, if there is no love? The whole point of that chapter is that love is absolute and it conquers all things. Your comments don't prove anything concerning tongues. You have not refuted them by any means. You're just endlessly attacking a straw man.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Your stupidity is persistent. Has not God broken the head of the leviathan and given it as food to the Ethiopians? The young lions roar after their prey, and seek their meat from God.
How much must be revealed to you that you will be satiated? Do not be double-minded. Why do you speak of things from above when you are from below?
Why do you speak of virtues when your passions rule you? You do not understand because I speak not of tongues but of you.
Why do you seek to understand tongues?
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Is it for the glory of God or for your own?
Is it not enough for you to struggle with loving your neighbor? Have you already mastered your passions that you seek to understand the virtues? Do not be double-minded.
God drew up His people out from their slave masters in Egypt and rained manna down on them from heaven, gave them food of the angels to their full.
But our fathers would not obey, but rejected, and turned their hearts back to Egypt.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte Yes and just look at the american dollar and the egyptian pyramid on it, it is just way to obvious that satan is running everything here and we have completely rejected the Laws of Yahweh to follow the gentile religion and you should know that if you are a gentile you are an un believer of Yahweh as this is what gentile means. Do not be decieved throw our anything written by the false apostle and read the true gospel spoken by The Messiah who was sent by Yahweh. satan used paul
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
Boldly stated, yet unsurprisingly idle. Who is to say that Satan does not use you?
Tell me, that I may know, what a follower of Yahweh believes through Yahshua?
Its like you've Isalmified Christianity. Allah is the One God and Mohammed is His prophet.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Why don't you try reading what Yahshua came to tell us, it is written in the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew's gospel account of Yahshua's walk here is Yahweh's gift and Paul is for those who reject Yahshua's word. Yahshua came to tell us to follow the commandments to death like he did, we must strive with every fiber of our being to hold the Ten commandments as the top of our lives above all else. Even if it means everyone hates you or tries to kill you, seek first the kingdom of Yahweh above all.
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
I asked a simple question, and what I got in response was a diatribe.
Can you state what you believe on the merits of your faith ALONE without needing to support it with the propaganda against other faiths?
If you asked me what Orthodoxy is I would tell you without saying how others are wrong. I would simply tell you what Orthodox believe and do.
So what is it you believe? And moreover, what is it that you do?
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte I believe what the spirit has taught me,and Yahshua told us in the gospel, that I must strive with every fiber of my being to not break Yahwehs Laws after I have repented and Yahweh has showed me all my sins, lest I should fall from what I have gained. He is just and Faithful to help those who repent and cry out to understand his true message. Only when we are willing to give up this dark world will we finally see the light and he will then come to us and guide us with his Love.
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
You have shown your ignorance. For did you not know you were quoting Paul when using the word gospel? After all Paul is the first to use "evangellion" meaning "good news," and his disciple, Mark, used the phrase in terms of "story of Jesus." Luke, also a disciple of Paul, copied Mark, as did Matthew and John.
But I digress. What does Yaushua say of passions?
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte Matthew walked with Yahshua and if you know the word of Yahweh from the tanack you would know he does not tolerate sin.
By saying I am ignorant you directly break the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself as I never insulted anyone. If a man still has a conscience it will convict the heart and it will know.
Passions?
Why does anyone need Paul if they already have Yahshua who was sent by Yahweh to tell us to follow the ten??
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
Wow this is all kinds of wrong..... it is Tanakh, I dunno what the tanack is.
You say I have insulted you and not loved my neighbor as myself because I called you ignorant, yet you say Paul is a servant of Satan. Hypocrite much?
So you now admit that you do not know what the passions are and further more that you do not need to understand.
Meaning that you do not read the Scriptures in light of the passions! I have nothing further to say.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte you have babbled on but do not even know the old scriptures where Yahweh makes known how he feels about us and what he has in store for us? If you really want to know your Father go and learn of him and then what Yahshua says will make sense. He even tells us we will reject him and follow another who comes in his own name?
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
@DopoNotte How can I be a hypochrite if I tell the truth supported by the scripture and the Good News Yahshua gave us.
I do not believe in the writings of Paul. They are the tares and will be revealed soon.
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
You are a hypocrite because yourself to a different standard than you do your neighbor. Oh oh oh! But you're telling the truth and spreading the good news! So its okay for you to act however you want.
Listen, I don't care about your diatribe. If you got a problem with Orthodoxy take it up with your Yahweh.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte Very good brother, I shall and i shall pray for your forgiveness for blaspheming Yahweh your creator. I pray for all men to see the simple beautiful truth of the Ten commandments and how light indeed the yoke is once we accept it and yes this includes Sabbath on the 7th day. Please try to sit down and just see there is no need for Paul, he is the test to see if we believe Yahshua's words. See Deuteronomy 13, Deuteronomy is the book of the Law and in Deut 5 we see the commandments
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
Just one question: what church or organization are you apart of?
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte I am not part of any church or organization. I am simply a servant of my King Yahshua and El Shaddai(God almighty). I am instructed and lead by the Spirit of Truth on the Ten commandments, the words of Moses, The Prophets and Yahshua the first son of Yahweh. I am of The Nation created for Yahshua, the followers of their Father. I am a man just like everyone else and know what Yahweh wants from us. He loves us all but by our own freewill, we must be saved. Yahweh said to listen!
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
@Doponotte Yahshua says in his words that the times will be just like the days of Noah and only one man walked with Yahweh then>?
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
Given that Paul saw the Lord himself and was accepted by the Apostles, who are you to reject him?
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Moreover what part of "He is just and Faithful to help those who repent and cry out to understand his true message. Only when we are willing to give up this dark world will we finally see the light and he will then come to us and guide us with his Love,".. does Orthodoxy not teach?
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte Brother please see that all these idols and man made saints are breaking the commandment, do not make idols. Is this not what he said? Why is it ok for the orthodox church to do what he said not to do? Please see I am not talking in anger but through love as I have been humbled by knowlege from El Shaddai and I am just a simple man who never went to church for the last 25 years. I was taught through the Holy Spirit of Truth recieved through repentance. Yahshua will save who listens
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
Brother, do you ever dream? Have you ever thought of scenarios in your mind? Have you ever imagined someone in your thoughts?
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte I did many things before repenting but have been shown how to live in truth. It is hard to give up the world and dreams of being known here and it is admittedly hard to throw out lusts. For instance adultery, looking at other women is easy to give up once you see them as your brothers and sisters. It is easy to give up eandeavors for wealth once we see we do not need them and Yahweh will provide for his children. There is no more worry with Yahweh. I share out of love for my brethren
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
I am guessing from your lack of response to the question "What does Yahshua say of passions?" that Yahshua either says nothing or you don't know.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Just look and see how mighty Yahweh is and in his mercy he even gave us ten fingers and ten toes so when we hold out our hands we remember his mighty Laws and when we look down we are again reminded of his Ten Laws. The Laws are good and righteous and are there to follow and not to just use as a loose kind of way of life, so you can say oops \i broke one but Paul said it's ok cause I am already forgiven. Gouge out your eye rather than sin, is that not serious enough a warning for Mankind??
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
The world seems to have thrown out every word Yahshua spoke from Yahweh and has decided they like Pauls no punishment gospel lie!!! We reject the word of Yahweh for man made traditions just like the Pharisees did when Yahshua came to show them what they were doing wrong.
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
Do not be stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! Lest you resist the Holy Spirit as our fathers have.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Why do you ask me questions about the Eucharist? Let us examine what the Apostle says.
'For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." 1Cor11:29
Yet you ask what the point of the Eucharist is without Love!
DopoNotte 2 years ago
you repeat to the world the words of satan spoken through the false apostle who leads the world to sin. Paul prophesied about himself when he spoke of the man of sin!!!
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
Really?
Does Satan cast out Satan?
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
And what does our Lord and Savior say about prayer, fasting and vigil? Do not be like the hypocrites! If you fast, you will harm your spirits, and if you pray you will bring condemnation upon yourself.
Yet Rejoice! And be exceeding glad! For if you heed what poor Stephen says you will learn to judge yourself, thus you will be chastened by the Lord, that you will not be condemned with the world.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@DopoNotte Matthew6:5 When you pray, dont be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get. 6 But when you pray, go away by yourself, shut the door behind you, and pray to your Father in private. Then your Father, who sees everything, will reward you.
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
@DopoNotte Well put mate couldnt agree with you more. I personally found the Jesus Prayer much more spiritually fulfilling than speaking in tongues but God blesses people where they are at
Paul020253 1 year ago 2
Tongues only cause confusion when people abuse them. But you cannot forbid them because they can be abused. That's like saying icons should be forbidden because some people exaggerate their devotion to them.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
...those who speak in tongues "utter mysteries with their spirits." Tongues are clearly something untintelligible (otherwise why would you need interpretation?). And Paul also clearly distinguishes the private tongues for personal edification with public tongues, which must be interpreted in order to edify the church. Paul's criticisms in 1 Cor. 14 was not against tongues in general, but against its abuse. But he certainly confirmed tongues as charismatics advocate today.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
You say tongues are unintelligible for which you need interpretation; yet do you not view the Scriptures in the same light?
Did you not know you too need a guide to help you understand the Scriptures? Yet are these not said plainly that babes 7 days old may understand the ways of life and live?
As long as you follow that cesspool of heresy, Aquinas, you will fail to interpret Scripture.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Who says that I think that Scripture does not need interpretation? I think I've made it clear enough in the past that I do not stand by the Evangelical concept that "Scripture interprets Scripture."
As for Aquinas - wouldn't it be more efficacious, both for you and for myself, that you say why he's wrong instead of just attacking him a a "cesspool of heresy"?
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Aquinas said, paraphrased, "faith takes over when reason has hit its limit." This is absolutely absurd. Aquinas is basically saying that faith is subservient to reason.
This is continued in the Catholic catechism and by former popes where they say that reason is a large factor for the faith.
Reason has almost nothing to do with Christianity. Nor is it superior to faith.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Reason has nothing to do with Christianity?
Christianity is built on seeking reason. That's why it was so influenced by Greek and Roman philosophy in the early days. That's indeed why it was so successful in spreading throughout the Roman Empire. Hellenophile Christianity based on reason is what Christianity cherishes. in Acts 17:11, when the Bereans were called nobler for researching the scriptures, would you call that faith?
That said, reason and faith do not collide.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Jesus says "oh ye of little FAITH" not "oh ye of little reason."
"If you had FAITH as much as a mustard seed" not "if you had reason as much as a mustard seed."
To the centurion "I have not found as much FAITH in all of Israel," not "I have not found as much reason in all of Israel."
Yet you say Christianity is built on seeking reason?
No it is built on seeking FAITH. Faith is letting go of reason!! That is a fundamental of faith - letting go!
DopoNotte 2 years ago
So faith and reason are contradictory now?
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
What type of faith do you have if you explain everything away with reason?
What kind of faith do you have if you understand everything?
The answer is none! If you already understand everything and can reason through everything, you don't have an organic living faith! We aren't called to explain everything or to reason through it.
We are called to believe it!
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Have you actually read the definitions of "faith" and of "reason"? Because you state that having faith is "letting go of reason." Why that is preposterous!
Would you believe in Muhammad if a Muslim came to you and said "Jesus is not God," and you said "Why on Earth should I believe you?" while he replied "Oh, faith." You don't believe things blindly, do you?
Where exactly has it occurred that Aquinas conclusions on the Trinity have been so strayed from "faith" as you put it?
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
If you A: believe the filioque and B: focus on reason as a means of understanding the Scriptures, then you will fundamentally misunderstand the fullness there of.
This is why I rightly say Aquinas is your Scriptures guide.
Even though you do not look to him regarding 1Cor14:1-3, you still try to REASON through the passages, instead of looking at 1Cor13:8 and realizing what is more profitable - to LOVE. If you love, you wouldn't care to speak in tongues or if others did it. Bottom line.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
More smokescreening.
Again you speak as if the gifts of the Holy Spirit and love are somehow irreconcilable, but that is not true.
Additionally, Aquinas' conclusions on the filioque are straight from the early Church. It's not like he filioque magically appeared in people's minds. It was approved separately, granted, but it was argued long before the Council of Toledo.
BTW - do you have the context of John Chrysostom's comments on tongues?
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Forgive me for I have sinned against you
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@Reazzurro90 Isaiah29: 13 And so the Lord says, These people say they are mine. They honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. And their worship of me is nothing but man-made rules learned by rote.[a] 14 Because of this, I will once again astound these hypocrites with amazing wonders. The wisdom of the wise will pass away, and the intelligence of the intelligent will disappear.
You will all learn the truth of Yahshua's true gospel Matt
servantofYAHW 2 years ago
If you have not love, it is meaningless if you speak in tongues; if you have love, you won't care if you speak in tongues.
Do you now understand St. John Chrysostom "neither altogether useless, nor very profitable."
It is important to follow the Saints of the Church and be guided properly in the faith.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Wow- you make some very insightful points here...Great Video!
MrBiblia 2 years ago
Thanks a lot!
davidpwithun 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Forgive me for I have sinned against you
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@davidpwithun wonderful job. Enjoyed listening
wren0007 1 year ago
Orthodox mom in Texas here, thoroughly enjoying all your videos and am going to have my kids watch them too. Keep up the good work!
bphillips355 2 years ago
Thank you very much!
davidpwithun 2 years ago
Your videos are very informative! Thanks for posting!
QuantumSelf13 2 years ago
@QuantumSelf13
Thank you!
davidpwithun 2 years ago
And I also have two other questions: 1.) what is the difference between God's uncreated energies and the Holy Spirit is, and 2.) what the difference between begetting and proceeding is. Sorry if I sound accusatory.
YaWhatIThoughtYa 2 years ago
Palamite theology isn't my strong point, but I'll do my best.
1. There is no different between God's uncreated energies and the Holy Spirit. "Uncreated" means that it is actually God, as God is the only uncreated. God's grace is God's presence, the Holy Spirit.
2. begetting is a term used only in reference to parents and their children -- it refers to a special kind of relationship. Proceeding means "to go forth from, emanate or issue from"
davidpwithun 2 years ago
You are right that God's Energies are in deed God. As created beings we participate in His Energies, what the West knows as Grace, but we can never know His Essence.
The Energies of God are not the Holy Spirit, at least not anymore than the Energies of God are Jesus Christ, or are the Father.
To say that the Holy Spirit is the Energies might lead some to believe that the Spirit is the Grace of God. This is not true. The Spirit is One of the Trinity, wholly Divine.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
I appreciate the correction -- thanks for that!
davidpwithun 2 years ago
Ah I just replied to David and should have replied to you.
The distinction you seek is the difference between God's Energies and God's Essence. As created beings we participate in Gods Energies; His Essence will forever remain unknowable to us. This is how it is written "No one has seen God at anytime," yet Jesus says "I pray that they may know thee."
Essence and Energies. The Holy Spirit is One Personhood of the Trinity.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
A good way to understand Essence and Energies is this. Try to describe your friend to me. You may describe his hair color, how tall he is, eye color, if he's nice, what he wears, what he likes to do, etc etc. But what are you really describing?
You're describing how he operates in the world around him - in other words his energies. Similarly we can not possibly describe Gods Essence; simply how God works.
I think to equate Energies w/ the Holy Spirit is wrong though.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
The reason I think this is because the Father is God, the Son is God, the Spirit is God. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, the Spirit is not the Father.
They are all uncreated, co-eternal, and put forth Grace; but they are not each other. "Unity in Essence, diversity in Personhood," St. Gregory Nanzianzus.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
The best way I've ever heard of it is relating it to water. Water comes in three forms - Ice, Water, and Vapor. All are different from one another, each have some properties that distinguishes them, yet all three are united in substance. No one would say that ice is not water, for instance.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
You must be careful with this one. What you are describing actually lends itself to modalistic monarchianism (what modern Oneness Pentecostals hold to) which states God is in different "modes" at different points. The reason this example doesn't work is because God is simultaneously Father, Son and Holy Spirit and water is not simultaneously gas, solid, and liquid. Imaging the Trinity in a concrete fashion seems to never work too well.
gCuezy 2 years ago
Well water exists simultaneously as liquid, solid, and gas, which would, in my opinion, point to a Trinity. I think what you're saying is a fair point, but if we are precise about it, it will work.
The conception of the light bulb (my father made that up) is good too. A light bulb contains light, but from it proceed heat and sound as well.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
I would still say these go too far. The light bulb one is a new one (and pretty good) but it's hard for me to imagine how the light heat and sound are of the same essence (the light bulb itself?). With the water example you could still separate the solid from the liquid and gas (etc) and God is indivisible. I'm weary of these because they attempt to do what the west has historically done (treat the doctrine as some sort of mathematical equation). It's best to remain a mystery.
gCuezy 2 years ago
Well they're only meant to give a confused person something to hold on to. It's not really meant to teach the entire mystery of the Trinity. :-P
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
I'd also say it seems to cause some issues with our view on Holy Mysteries... We shouldn't believe something ONLY if we can have a concrete understanding of everything involved.
gCuezy 2 years ago
Is modalism, by the way, still popular among Oneness Pentecostals? I thought they had given that up for the "Jesus Only" perspective, that God = Jesus, plain and simple, and that Holy Spirit and Father are but titles.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
You know, it depends on who you talk to.. usually they deny any charge you bring (modalism - "jesus only" etc). That's why I said monarchianism (patripassionism). They basically believe Jesus IS the Father AND the Holy Spirit and they're titles but that He (God) was operating in different 'modes' at different times. Basically from this you could say that the Father died on the cross (as Jesus) and then became the Holy Spirit. It's full of contradictions... regardless of what they call(cont)
gCuezy 2 years ago
(cont)it, it seems to always boil down to some heresy that was dealt with millenia ago.
gCuezy 2 years ago
Basically every large protestant denomination, ie Lutheran, Calvinist, Methodist, Mormon, Pentecostal, Baptist, JW, Jews for Jesus, 7DA, etc revolves around some form of heresy.
I remember my Catechism teacher telling me that Pentecostals are X heresy, Calvinists are Y heresy etc. I don't remember which ones belong to which group; but you see the point I'm getting at right?
The Church has already fought against these heresies in the first 500 centuries.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
I don't think it's fair to lump Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses in with Protestants. They're Restorationists, and have nothing in common with Protestants (they're not even Christians). I think to a large extent what you say is true though. Mormonism was addressed from the very beginning, and JW are Arians, essentially.
Orthodoxy is great. But I still cannot accept its rejection of the charismatic movement as well as its rejection of the filioque. Thomas Aquinas convinced me on the latter.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
I am making a video soon about the charismatic movement and it's dangers, mainly discussing tongues...
I hope you'll check back and give it a watch.
gCuezy 2 years ago
The charismatic movement is biblical and orthodox.
I will check it out, though.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
The charismatic movement is A: not biblical, and B: not Orthodox.
This is because the Holy Spirit, the heavenly King, the comforter, the Spirit of truth, who art present everywhere and fillest all things, the treasure of every good and giver of life.....
REMOVES confusion, doesn't ADD it.
People "speaking in tongues" is not the same as Pentecost when everyone understood everyone else language that they could understand the Gospel.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
Not Orthodox but it is orthodox and it is biblical. The tongues spoken at Pentecost were both understood tongues and were also not understood. How were they also not understood? Because only people who understood the languages being spoken responded. The rest laughed it off as drunk men at 9 AM.
In the other instances of Acts, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the converts, they immediately began speaking in tongues. You say it's not the same, but Paul in 1 Corinthians 14 claims that....
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Why do you quote 1Cor14:1-3 as though you have understood 1Cor13:8 ?
1Cor 12:10, 28, 13:4, 11, 14, are all incredibly important to understanding the validity of 14:1-3.
The charismatic movement, as it exists especially in America today, is not biblical. I will follow St. John Chrysostom when he says about speaking in tongues "neither altogether useless, nor very profitable."
DopoNotte 2 years ago
1 Cor. 13:8 refers to the all-conquering power of love, not the the ceasing of the gifts. It speaks of how love is essential in all that we do. With regards to the rest of your verses, there is nothing that contradicts the charismatic message.
You see, you make the mistake, as of several others, of lumping tongues entirely together. But that's not the case. There are two types of tongues - the private prayer tongues (which all receive upon being filled by the Spirit), and the tongues for....
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
As I stated "why do you quote 1Cor14:1-3 as though you understand 1Cor13:8?"
Let me be more clear. If you do not have love, your ability to speak in tongues is meaningless. If you have love, you won't care to speak in tongues; 1Cor12:10, 28, show not everyone have the same gifts. Yet you say it has nothing to do with it?
This only proves my over arching point - what matters is who your guide is for interpreting Scriptures! Clearly Aquinas isn't cutting it
DopoNotte 2 years ago
I referred to Aquinas only with regards to the filioque. I do not recall Aquinas saying anything concerning that passage in Corinthians.
Regardless I still don't see where the alleged contradiction or fallacy is with regards to 1 Cor. 13:8. It is merely referring to that when Christ comes, all the gifts will cease to function, but love itself will remain forever. That does not diminish the importance of the gifts.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Forgive me for I have sinned against you
DopoNotte 2 years ago
a role which is reserved for Christ alone -- since he is the only mediator between God and man.
YaWhatIThoughtYa 2 years ago
It's a distortion of the meaning of the text to use the Scriptural passage stating that Christ is the only mediator/intercessor between God and man to disparage icons or the intercession of the saints. If we interpret that passage this way, we also have to reject the notion that Christians should pray for one another -- thereby acting as intercessors and mediators. The meaning of the text is that only Christ reconciles God and man -- through the Incarnation, in which God became man.
davidpwithun 2 years ago
Thank you for explaining all of this -- I think I understand what you are saying better now.
YaWhatIThoughtYa 2 years ago
Not that I'm claiming that icons are necessarily idolatrous, but I do not understand how to reconcile those two premises. Also, I have no problem revering Holy Images like the ones which were made in the Temple, provided it is done symbolically, but I have heard claims that God's uncreated grace resides in icons, that they work miracles, "whoever honors the image honors the prototype," and that icons are "windows to heaven" and "bring us to the Father" --
YaWhatIThoughtYa 2 years ago
To each of the claims you've heard about icons:
1. God's grace can and is indeed conferred through icons. It's not that icons inherently possess grace, but that God confers the grace through matter (which has been redeemed) to the worshiper. Rather than saying grace "resides" in icons, I think better terminology might be that God's grace can be passed through icons.
2. Not all icons work miracles -- there are several though, that have. Again, God's grace working through the icon -- not some
davidpwithun 2 years ago
inherent power of the icon itself.
3. Yes, we believe that when we kiss an icon or bow before it, we are kissing or bowing to the person depicted, not a piece of wood -- so the honored paid to the image can be said to pass to the prototype.
4. We call them "windows to heaven" because they visually depict the unseen "great cloud of witnesses" surrounding us during worship.
5. They "bring us to the Father" insofar as anything else used in the worship of the Father does.
davidpwithun 2 years ago
How can you affirm the use of icons of Christ without falling into Nestorianism? You end up saying that the icon ONLY depicts Christ's humanity, but since the Council of Chalcedon affirmed that his two natures are united "without division, separation, or confusion," wouldn't that make it impossible to depict Christ's humanity without also claiming to depict his divine essence -- which would be idolatry?
YaWhatIThoughtYa 2 years ago
As you yourself quote the Council of Chalcedon as saying, Christ's humanity and divinity are "without...separation." They are inseparable. Where one is present, the other is also. If I took a photograph of you, would you say that it was not a picture of you because it can't capture your thoughts and your soul as well? Of course not-- it's you.
Ironically, the Nestorian (Assyrian) Church doesn't use icons anymore -- they gave them up in the early modern period due to Islamic influence.
davidpwithun 2 years ago
I love your channel and your videos.. from your Coptic Orthdox brothers in Christ. God bless.
Pharaoh714 2 years ago
Thank you very much!
davidpwithun 2 years ago
As usual, well put together and informative video.
I still remember learning in an Arts and Architectural History class in college that the tell-tale sign of an Orthodox Church is the iconostasis, because no other church (Christian or otherwise) has them. They are truly beautiful.
I also remember learning about the whitewashing of the Haggia Sophia and other jewels of Eastern Christendom, such a shame. The Muslims are so full of zeal, and yet so lacking of truth, may God open their eyes soon.
thekingmaker10 2 years ago
Right about now I'd be satisfied if he opens the eyes of the West again before it implodes.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
As much as some Orthodox still have hard feelings about the Roman Catholics plundering Constantinople in 1204 (as well as many places in the Holy Land during other Crusades), I've sometimes wondered if that wasn't God's way of preserving the heritage of the Byzantine Empire and its Church -- the RCs stole them and display them now in their own churches; the Muslims would have simply destroyed them. I think the latter fate is much worse than the former.
davidpwithun 2 years ago
Great video David, Thank You.
NikolaosOrthodoxos 2 years ago
*yawns*
KCwellard 2 years ago
If my videos bore you, why are you watching them? :)
davidpwithun 2 years ago
Trust me, I'm not putting myself through it again. (;
KCwellard 2 years ago
Okay...
um...
A little advice: if you don't like them, don't watch them. You'd think this was common sense, but apparently not...
davidpwithun 2 years ago
Wow. That's some pretty good advice.
In fact, it's so good that my advice to you is to put it under more info, maybe you can save more people that way.
But you get more views contacting people directly don't you?
Again, thanks oh wise one.
haha
KCwellard 2 years ago
Did I ever contact you directly?
davidpwithun 2 years ago
@davidpwithun Thought this was a good time to interject...
Regardless of this troll, I wanted to let you know that your videos are amazing. As an Orthodox catechumen coming in during Pascha who is interested in philosophy and theology (and most likely seminary) I find it sad that we lack any real english apologetics. Keep up the great work... it's necessary.
Xristos Anesti
gCuezy 2 years ago
Thank you very much; I really appreciate it.
davidpwithun 2 years ago
@gCuezy
I am struck by your comments and feel a need to reply. You are yet to be Orthodox, correct? Yet you say you most likely want to enter seminary. This is dangerous.
Converts have an extreme zeal and passion (I use this word on purpose) during the immediately time up to and for years even after their conversion. They want to rush out into the desert and be like the greatest saints. Trust me, I had this feeling too.
This zeal needs to be tempered with the patience of the cradles
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@gCuezy
In my parish there are three wonderful Arabic families and I have gravitated towards the matriarch of one of the families and I listen to her a lot. I dare not utter a word in her presence. I have so much to learn.
This is my suggestion for you, that you find someone in your parish from which to learn. The journey is just beginning! You have not yet begun to partake in the struggle.
And remember that it is a marathon, not a sprint.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@gCuezy
This is similar answer to why Orthodoxy does not have "apologetics" per se in the Western sense. And what need do we have for them?
We know we're the truth; we don't need to debate anyone about it. Are we really going to bring people into the faith because we "won" a "debate" ? Did Jesus teach us to bring in converts by debating the Scriptures?
Save yourself, and a thousand around you shall be saved/; St. Seraphim of Sarov.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@gCuezy
Plus we are the only faith that has true evangelists; our monastics, who deeply love the world that they give up their lives in order to prayer for and for the betterment of the world.
We also have the liturgy. Divine Liturgy is the ultimate form of evangelism, for it is an active participation in coming to God!
These are two of the greatest forms of evangelism; and neither is pathetic apologetics. Focus on the struggle of these two.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@gCuezy
As Fr. Lazarus, the spiritual leader of St. Antony's monastery in Egypt, states "One hour of prayer mindful of God, is better than a lifetime of beneficient service."
Focus on what St. Theophan the Recluse says, prayer of mind in the heart. Nous, and Kardia. Focus on the struggle of the Jesus Prayer; focus on the struggle of this asceticism.
I know you are burning to do a lot right now and want to take it all on all at once. But trust me, the Jesus prayer is enough for now
DopoNotte 2 years ago
I have been looking into Orthodoxy for well over a year now and I've discussed many of these things with my spiritual Fr (who is very good at making me patient). I look up to many in the parish and consider my spiritual father and our sub deacon to be mentors. I'm aware that you don't convert and become a seminarian the next day (why would you do that in any tradition?) and I have a long way to go to finish my undergraduate schooling anyways.. (cont)
gCuezy 2 years ago
I honestly appreciate you giving me advice, but some of the things you've said are reasons I still have second thoughts about orthodoxy. Not because of the content but because of the differing approaches. Western Orthodoxy absolutely needs apologetics and I'm not sure why there is such a knee jerk reaction to it. Orthodoxwiki talks about how necessary it is and gives examples of past orthodox apologists. While I have the utmost respect and humility towards monastics it seems like (cont)
gCuezy 2 years ago
...a huge stretch to call them the 'only true evangelist.'
I appreciate that your views are (generally) orthodox but these things worry me because it seems like they are taken to the extreme.
We are told to be prepared to give defense for what we believe by St Peter and I can't possibly imagine how this could be wrong. "Winning a debate" is was helped me remain a Christian theist.
gCuezy 2 years ago
@gCuezy
What is Western Orthodoxy? Do you mean Western Rite? Last time I checked there is simply Orthodoxy; not regions of it. Please explain what you mean.
We are told to be prepared to give "defense." Defense is the operative word. Stephen, my patron, only gave his account after he was summoned. James was only martyred after he gave his account.
We give a defense of our faith when it is required of us.
A year is not a long period of time. I know to a undergrad a year seems like a long
DopoNotte 2 years ago
... time but it's not. You're so young and vigorous. I too was that way. I'm trying to help you not make the same mistakes I made.
I am curious about your comments regarding you Sp. Fr. Is he your Fr. Confessor, and more importantly is he your priest?
Monastics are true evangelists; always have been, always will be; so also is the Liturgy. I know a convert whose priest told him for 3 years after his conversion to read nothing about the faith except the Divine Liturgy.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
What do you mean by "[my{ views are (generally) Orthodox" ?? That is hilarious! Is a catechumin really going to tell an Orthodox that his views are not Orthodox? And yet you say you have humility? I think my point is being proven. But I'll let you explain what you mean.
What is being extreme is saying that after a year of looking into Orthodoxy you already have ideas of wanting to be a priest. That is extreme. I'm simply trying to bring you back to reality.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
@gCuezy
Only after you've become illumined, many months, sometimes years, does the struggle begin! When you are given a prayer rule, and you start finding it difficult to keep it, then you will understand how much of a struggle it is!
Every convert thinks Orthodoxy needs apologetics. I thought so too and we think we're gonna help defend the faith by doing it!
Pride is a terrible passion
And if you currently don't have any problems when praying... you haven't really begun to pray yet!
DopoNotte 2 years ago
This is exactly what I'm talking about... I wasn't telling you I've looked into Orthodox for a year to "flash my credentials" but to let you know about myself. I'm a quasi-philosopher interested in theology who has done my research.
By 'western Orthodoxy' I meant Orthodoxy in western countries. In these countries Christianity is being constantly attacked and ridiculed and I find that worthy of defense.
Changing from apologia (defense) to 'defense' doesn't change the meaning.
gCuezy 2 years ago
Your last comment is the type that scares me... the knee jerk reaction that anything to do with apologetics is "pride"
I never once said I wished to be a priest, and I don't have an interest in it at this point.
By your definition of humility, I should never point out heresy (or question the beliefs of others) if someone has more 'time accumulated.'
My Spiritual father is both.
Once again, THANK YOU for your intent to help me out, I just don't enjoy being stereotyped and I must digress.
gCuezy 2 years ago
Orthodoxy is not a philosophy; it is not a theology; it is not even a religion. Orthodoxy is the Life of the World. In it is the end of all occult like rituals, and the end of religion. Fr. Schmemann states this clearly in "For the Life of the World"
The hierarchs, the saints and the Church who combat heresy. The Church which you aren't even officially apart of yet. Thinking the Church needs your help to combat heresy is pride.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
During Orthros we read Psalm 50, of which verses 13-15 are very clear. When God has bestowed His Holy Spirit on us, then we shall teach transgressors His ways.
Also look to Phillipians 2:12' work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
There is no knee jerk reaction. I am simply calling your statements for what they are.
Slow down, do not rush in; this is a marathon not a sprint.
DopoNotte 2 years ago
I understand that, and appreciate your insight. I'm trying to point out to you that you are being irrational. I don't think orthodoxy NEEDS ME to defend it or Christianity. I think we're all called to.This non-confrontational view of evangelism seems to be lacking for today.
I would take it as an insult if I were the video poster, but low and behold you're up in other comments telling him how YOUR AN APOLOGIST TO YOUR FAMILY!!!!
gCuezy 2 years ago
My personal issues regarding how my family views my conversion to Orthodoxy has little to do with me "witnessing" the faith, or "apologetics" as you say.
If they ask me questions, i will answer. It is wrong however, and most definitely NOT Orthodox, to approach those who are not Orthodox and demean them by saying they're wrong and their theology is wrong etc
That is not Orthodoxy. We live our faith in the face of the world; for the life of the world. And we witness when it is required of us
DopoNotte 2 years ago
I see you've also favorited Archbishop Lazar Puhalo who's SOLE PURPOSE on youtube is to discuss modern issues and defend orthodoxy.
What do you think of the person who's video we're commenting to?
I think that I am being singled out here...
I would ask you to not be too prideful as a convert who has grown in the faith.