| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Buddhism | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 8 2010, 08:08 AM (5,148 Views) | |
| kenny | Dec 10 2010, 01:56 PM Post #376 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I'm just saying the more you describe him the more Jesus sounds just like you. |
![]() |
|
| KlavierBauer | Dec 10 2010, 02:03 PM Post #377 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Ax: +1 - ![]() Without getting too sucked into the battle of misunderstanding that most protestants seem to have learned bout apostolic traditions...
You seem to misunderstand all three of these things. First - (I won't speak for catholicism here) in Orthodox Christianity, not everything is based on what's found in the Bible, since it didn't exist in the time of Christ, and really didn't come into form until quite awhile after. The folks who wrote most of the Bible wrote lots of other stuff to, and while we may not consider all of it inspired truth, or authoritative, neither do we dismiss entirely because it isn't in the Bible. I'm not going to answer the above questions, but intend only to shed some light on your misunderstanding of them. 1) We don't pray to saints or to Mary. We have the same belief of Saints that you do - people that are holy, and believed to be in Heaven (as per Paul's definition). ((In every other language where I've looked, the word "saint" is the same as the word for "holy")) We ask Saints to intercede on our behalf - to pray for us. It's not about it being more powerful or something - prayer isn't magic. But, believing that those in heaven are constantly in a state of worship and prayer, and being as close to the action as they are, it seems logical to ask them to help us out by praying for us... 2) There are many traditions in prayer that aren't explicitly declared positive or negative in scripture. While Catholics use beads on the rosary, the Orthodox also have a very similar tradition with prayer ropes. It goes back to the idea of repetitive prayer and meditation - I know you don't subscribe to that concept as a whole, but I'm just trying to explain the use of the physical object in helping prepare and stabilize the mind for the spiritual part of it. Some people kneel when they pray, some pray with their hands extended towards God. Some pray doing cartwheels down the aisle, and some pray with a full band backing them up. Scripture talks about praying quietly in our closets - so it's not fair to pic one tradition for practice and proclaim it non-christian because it isn't referenced in scripture. Much of the modern service of worship is based on tradition rather than scripture, yet it is largely accepted. 3) The theology that sins aren't absolved if not confessed to a priest is nonsense. The act of confession is an act of spiritual discipline that is very tricky. It's still uncomfortable enough for me that I rarely do it - that's not to say it isn't beneficial however. We confess to a witness. In the early church this happened at each and every communion, and frequently happened in front of the entire congregation. The priest doesn't absolve us of our sins, and reading through the confession prayer makes this very clear. The priest is there to help us confess to God, and to pray with, and for, us as we do so. Much of people's problems with these traditions are based in misunderstanding of the meaning behind them. It's not dissimilar from those who call the veneration of icons idolatry, but have no problem wearing a cross, or having a very large cross in the sanctuary of their church. Edited by KlavierBauer, Dec 10 2010, 02:07 PM.
|
|
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper "He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | Dec 10 2010, 02:11 PM Post #378 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Probably not, but all the same I find it mildly amusing to hound you.
Yes indeed, a collection of texts and letters dating from late antiquity that certainly contains some mythology.
It should be amusing. The absurdity of this whole farcical thread and topic is uproariously amusing. It can almost be described as Magic Theatre in purest sense of Hesse. In another dimension the spirit of Goethe - A pioneer *New Ager* if ever there was one - is positively splitting his sides with diabolic laughter. |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Dec 10 2010, 02:21 PM Post #379 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Then you aren't paying attention. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Dec 10 2010, 02:32 PM Post #380 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I guess I'll use this point to start in. The key Greek word in the phrase here is "entos," which means within, inside, within the boundaries or limitations of. Also important is the word "basileia," which is generally translated as kingdom, but that only captures a portion of the term and tends to make one think more in terms of place, geography, or real estate. When you see Jesus quoted in English Bibles talking about the "Kingdom" (basileia) of God or of Heaven, it is very helpful to read the word as the "Kingship" of God or of Heaven - a concept that emphasizes a form of relationship between two beings, the nature of an allegiance and an authoritative status of one being in another's life. Even better yet, hearing it in your head as both kingdom/kingship - that captures the fuller meaning of the Greek word. So when Jesus says the Kingdom/Kingship of God is within/inside/within the boundaries of our selves, that's precisely what he meant. God's Spirit does indeed dwell within us. This is central to Christian thought - it's at the root of the majority theological understanding of both baptism and the Eucharist, and it shows up routinely in our prayers, and in Jesus' prayer in John 17. In other words, some sense any believer is an incarnational being, a human person in whom and through whom God's very Spirit dwells. As the scriptures say, we are a new creation - our old life has gone; we are now something new and different - and that difference is the indwelling of God within us. That's something very different than to say that part of our very being is part of God, or that together, we all make up God. We are, as a complete creation, something totally separate and other-than divine. Even though that other-than was created in the divine image, at our core we remain just that - the image, not the thing itself. It is Christian belief that we are not innately divine, nor do we innately contain part of the "spark" or "spirit" of God - but that that Spirit can, and does, dwell within our other-than-divine selves. Having said that, it's all irrelevant. The point that caused this part of the discussion was Larry's assertion that Christian contemplative/meditative prayer is a form of trying to focus inwardly, on one's self, and thereby to find God, as part of one's self. This is absolutely incorrect; anyone who knows anything about the Christian contemplative/meditative disciplines are the exact *opposite* of Larry's assertion. In Lectio Divina, a person reads a biblical text, gradually focusing in on one phrase, or even one word, within the text of the passage, and meditating on that word or phrase, asking God to open up one's understanding of it, and then contemplating on the implications of that meaning for one's own life. This form of prayer is a means of focusing one's thoughts onto the divine and away from other distractions, in order to hear the "small, still voice of God" - not to dwell on the small, still voice of one's self. Similarly, centering prayer is a means of focusing completely on God, not one's self - gradually stripping away the distractions of the world, and the distractions of one's self, to focus entirely on hearing God - not to simply meditate on "what do I think?" As to comments about the emergent/emerging church, it's a silly thing to discuss this phenomenon as if it's a monolithic block of anything. It's as ridiculous to try to do that as it would be to try to view all Catholics, or all Orthodox, or all Protestants as a monolithic block. Whether aspects of the emergent/emerging church are good or bad - and, having studied the movement in some depth personally, I can say it contains both - it's pretty silly to say that these spiritual disciplines are only part of the emergent/emerging church. It's also pretty dismissive of the history of the faith, showing more of a tendency to want to twist, or outright ignore, history in order to defend one's own theological sacred cows. And it does no good to offer up quotes from sources who agree with one's viewpoint criticizing these kinds of things, because there are at least as many quotes available from equally qualified people (if not more so) who disagree with them. Larry's worried about outside influences that would distort the faith to be something that it is not - that it would become not Christianity, and not Buddhism (or anything else you'd care to fill the blank in with), but some third thing that's a melding of the two or more things. In Christianity, and probably other venues as well, the concept is known as "syncretism." It's a very valid concern; we should indeed be on guard against denying or watering down the essential tenets of the faith in order to appeal to a greater number of people by making the teachings of the faith more palatable. But there are two important things about this. First, not every adjustment to one's thinking about the faith constitutes a denial or watering down of the faith's essential tenets. There are many times when, in a different time, place, or culture, a new layer of understanding of the faith, and the meaning of the scriptures, can take place, that are entirely consistent with the actual teachings of Christ and the scriptures - maybe not the way that we have understood them within our own cultural framework, but nonetheless equally Christian. A person can study the way that Matteo Ricci immersed himself in Chinese culture and Confucianism, and recast the gospel of Christ in concepts and language that would sound very odd, if not heretical, to western understanding, but which enabled many Chinese to understand the message - the *real* message - in a way that worked for them. This is not syncretism. Second, when trying to guard against syncretism, a person has to ask if the "pure" version of the faith he's trying to preserve from distortion isn't itself already victimized by distortion. Many Christians have understandings of the faith that are extremely limited - narrow-minded, even - because they themselves have only been exposed to a relatively small band of the full spectrum of the faith. So everything that claims to be part of the faith, but is inconsistent with their own limited viewpoints, is rejected and arguments to accept them are dismissed as syncretistic watering down of the "true religion." Arguments within Christianity often center around this very thing - arguing whether some new thing is acceptable or a heretical deviation. I've been pointed at as a poster child for this dangerous development within the church, and that as a Christian, and especially as a pastor, I "should know better." In fact, I do know better. I know better than many others about some of the topics that have come up in this thread. I know more about, and have more experience practicing Lectio Divina and Centering Prayer than most, possibly all, here, having been taught the disciplines by a noted expert in these disciplines. I know better about the roots of the Reformation than most, if not all, here. I know better about the depths of Protestant theology, and at least mainline Protestant doctrines of the nature, authority, and interpretation of scripture than most, if not all, here. I know more about the good and bad to be found within the emergent/emerging church movement than most, if not all here, having read in depth, interviewed leaders within the movement, and written critically about that research, as part of my seminary studies. Yet, despite the fact that in fact, I do indeed know better than most, if not all here about these topics, and I have the transcript to prove it, my knowledge and opinions will be discounted as meaningless nonsense - worse than meaningless; they'll actually be considered a threat to the faith - just because some of what I say is contrary to the version of the faith learned on Grandma's knee. Grandma's knee was a good place. I loved Grandma. It's where I first was taught the faith, too. But Grandma, for all of her love and good intentions, only had a portion of the answers available to her. She passed on the faith as best she understood and lived it, and that was good. But now that I am no longer a child, I do not understand my faith as it was taught to me as a child. Now I understand it as a man, and with a far greater depth than Grandma ever did, or ever could, have taught. One very large problem with American Christianity is that all too often, it never gets off Grandma's knee. Too many Christians' study and depth of understanding of the faith stops at about age 12 or 13 - and all too often, the education before that wasn't so hot, either. The result is a church that gets locked into a rather narrow and rigid understanding of Christ's message, and what is and is not legitimate within the bounds of Christian belief. And the outcome of that is exactly what we see all across the country - the leaving of the faith, and the church, in droves, because the way the faith is understood and taught has been almost completely locked into an understanding and a framework that is, at its youngest, some 500 years old. There isn't anything about Jesus' message that is inherently abhorrent to people today than it was in 1950. But the church has stubbornly dragged its feet in coming into the world as it exists today, telling its Truth to people in ways that they can approach it, consider it, respond to it, and live it. And that includes revisiting even some of the most time-honored teachings of the church. Trying to express the infinite, transcendent truths of God through theology and doctrine, the Protestant Reformers did an excellent job of conveying those thoughts to the people of their time and place. And they've served the church well. But in the very same spirit that the Reformers worked within, there will be new times and places and cultures which will examine the very same issues, and find different ways to understand them. This is the normal result of the march of human history and understanding. It is a good thing. Perched on the shoulders of the great minds of the church from the past, we have a privilege of seeing the world from a different vantage point - and in some ways, a better vantage point - than they had. And if we do not use that different vantage point to understand God more completely, understanding different facets of the total truth of God that those saints who went before us never could have, then we ourselves are being unfaithful. We are not using the intelligence and intellectual and spiritual resources God has given us to further Christ's mission in the world. People who need to hear the gospel are being not just ignored, but driven away, by our frequent clinging onto outmoded concepts. And I believe that we Christians will be called into accountability for that clinging to tradition over Christ some day. So, again: while in the past, and to some yet today, some Christians have seen meditation as something "other" and contradictory to Christ, it is not inherently so. Many Christians have known for millenia, and many more are coming to understand every day, that meditation is a valued spiritual discipline that is consistent with Christianity and can expand the depth and breadth of one's faith in Jesus. And there are many teachings within Buddhism that are quite parallel with Christianity, to the point that many Christians have found great meaning in Buddhist writings, in addition to their own holy scriptures. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 10 2010, 02:33 PM Post #381 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
UHG Dewey! It's so big and long. |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Dec 10 2010, 02:36 PM Post #382 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
That's very perceptive, kenny. As Christians have sought to find the real, "Historical Jesus" over the years, one very sharp observer noted that the odd thing about all these "quests" has been that the Jesus that was found invariably looked an awful like the searcher, saying that the quest for the historical Jesus is a lot like looking down into a well and seeing one's own face reflected back.
|
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Dec 10 2010, 02:37 PM Post #383 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Why, thank you, I didn't realize it was showing. ![]() But just for you, I offered a shorter follow-up. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Dec 10 2010, 02:38 PM Post #384 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Show me where the Bible tells us to do that.
Standing, kneeling, doing cartwheels, in a closet, in a field, none of these require an icon. Show me in scripture where you get the idea that you need an icon.
You are Eastern Orthodox, correct? http://www.cresourcei.org/creeddositheus.html According to this, you confess only to an orthodox priest.
I can see your point to a degree. I can also see however, why is is seen as idolatry. I can see why we disagree on so many points. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Dec 10 2010, 02:42 PM Post #385 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
You did a fine job explaining the difference between an indwelling of the spirit and man being God, but when you came to the part above you once again jumped the shark. It is exactly what I said it is, it is the exact opposite of what you say it is, and it has no place in Christianity. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Dec 10 2010, 02:46 PM Post #386 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
The real Jesus Christ can be found in scripture. Not in church tradition, not in buddhist laced New Age concepts, and not in the cess pools they call seminaries these days. If the Jesus I describe sounds different from the one you found, perhaps yours might sound more like mine if you stuck with scripture. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Dec 10 2010, 02:48 PM Post #387 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
OK, Larry.
|
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 10 2010, 02:50 PM Post #388 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
My Dewey, it's so small and short! |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Dec 10 2010, 03:03 PM Post #389 |
|
MAMIL
|
Paul's version of him, at least, with a little help from King James VI of Scotland. Presumably there was a big argument not unlike this one a couple of thousand years ago where people decided what to put in the Bible. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| KlavierBauer | Dec 10 2010, 03:14 PM Post #390 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Larry, I'm not going to get into a "where in the bible does it say...." argument. I've already dismissed the premise earlier that the Bible is the only valuable text. This is a fundamental area where we disagree, and I'm ok with that. You forget also, that my Bible is different than yours (assuming you're not reading a text from the Catholic or Orthodox canon). Tobit 12:12 for example, references prayers of intercession, as does Revelation 18: 17-20 where Saints, and even Apostles are specifically called upon for intercession. There are several biblical references for intercessory prayer for those that need them - I personally, as explained above, don't measure everything I hear against the Bible, though it is a valuable tool for measurement. I know this doesn't gel with you, but I also look to history, tradition, and yes, the dogma of the Church. I use all of those things to inform my opinions. As for confession, we do confess to a priest. His entire job is to serve his congregation in matters such as this, so he is the logical "witness," and as clergy, he is the logical one to perform this sacrement. James 5:16 talks about confessing our sins to one another, so certainly there is biblical precedent for the idea of confessing our shortcomings to others to practice our own humility. I will confess that I didn't read the entire link you posted - but it is a reprint of the Confession of Dositheus - this was an historical event coming out of the meeting of the Synod in 1672 to address a political and hierarchical issue (a Patriarch espousing Predestination). There are numerous articles though, on Orthodox Confession as a Sacrament if you're truly interested in learning about it. As for praying with icons - I've never intimated that one must pray with an icon... Ideally we would all be praying constantly. This is one of the reasons monks carry prayer ropes, so that they can aid their mind in being in a perpetual state of prayer. No icon needed. Nothing in Orthodoxy teaches the necessity of an icon being present to pray. Veneration is something else entirely, not synonymous with prayer. There are numerous well written articles on this idea as well, and I can recommend a few blogs/books if your'e genuinely interested in seeing a different perspective of what you might perceive Orthodoxy to be. (rosaries and prayer ropes aren't icons - icons are "written" specifically about the Saints or events they represent, and are considered to be a sort of "window"). |
|
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper "He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Dec 10 2010, 03:31 PM Post #391 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Are you saying the Orthodox don't have a parallel theology of Holy Orders that the administration of the Sacraments is of Christ acting through the priest? The Catholic position is that it is Christ who offers the Eucharist through the ministerial priest (acting "in persona Christi") and it is Christ who forgives sins acting through the priest by virtue of ordination -- in a way in which you or I "blessing bread" or "forgiving sins" cannot consecrate or absolve others. We can forgive and absolve others for sins against us, but Christ forgives and absolves "absolutely" -- even if the injured parties to our sins do not forgive us or are not able to forgives due to remoteness, death, etc. I thought the Orthodox had the same theology as the Catholics on these essential sacramental points. For the other two points, we are largely in agreement. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Nobody's Sock | Dec 10 2010, 03:56 PM Post #392 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Aw finally! I was wondering when the Catholic bashing was going to start. We haven't had a good Catholic bash for weeks now. |
| "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Dec 10 2010, 04:56 PM Post #393 |
|
Shortstop
|
Since it is the one true church any other sort of bashing just doesn't matter. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| KlavierBauer | Dec 10 2010, 05:02 PM Post #394 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
IT: I don't know enough to know whether we share the idea of Holy Orders, though the rest of what you write seems to largely echo my understanding of the Orthodox perspective on confession as well. I hope my writing didn't imply that a priest isn't necessary - I was simply trying to get away from the idea that the priest himself is the one absolving sins. This isn't to say though, that I believe the only way for sins to be forgiven is through the sacrament of confession. I believe we can ask God for forgiveness for our sins, and receive it - I also believe it is beneficial for each of us to confess our sins openly. That's me talking btw - not the church. |
|
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper "He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple | |
![]() |
|
| brenda | Dec 10 2010, 05:46 PM Post #395 |
![]()
..............
|
Why do people make faith so complex? It just doesn't have to be that way. |
|
“Weeds are flowers, too, once you get to know them.” ~A.A. Milne | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | Dec 10 2010, 06:13 PM Post #396 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
When it comes to selling bad ideas; obscurantism ftw!
Edited by Moonbat, Dec 10 2010, 06:16 PM.
|
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Dec 10 2010, 06:33 PM Post #397 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Yes, please, more gas. What this thread needs is more gas.
|
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 10 2010, 06:57 PM Post #398 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
NO NO NO! Don't use more gas.
|
![]() |
|
| brenda | Dec 10 2010, 06:58 PM Post #399 |
![]()
..............
|
Better pray some more, Kenny.
|
|
“Weeds are flowers, too, once you get to know them.” ~A.A. Milne | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Dec 10 2010, 06:59 PM Post #400 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
TSA took the heat off them for a while.
|
![]() |
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |















11:05 AM Jul 11