• TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:08 PM
    It's fair to say, I think, that your one post in this thread has done more to turn people away from Christ than all the other posts written previously by the OP.
    158 replies | 10268 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:59 PM
    What then are the bunches of errors you are alluding to? I agree that he could have driven his point more with the verse from Corinthians which you suggested above. It was also a very short article addressing a topic that could probably fill pages upon pages. I just don't see where all the bunches of errors are. Please list them.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:56 PM
    Very good. I thought you didn't. I must have confused you with someone else.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:55 PM
    Of course you are. - rep
    20 replies | 131 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:49 PM
    So you do agree that there be will those called great in the Kindgom of Heaven and those called the least in the Kindgom of Heaven (as Christ described), and what distinguishes these are the rewards they were given on account of the good works they did?
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:32 PM
    When a child understands that they are but a child, then they can truly learn. A child has gifts, and learning how to learn is one of the greatest gifts a child can have. And in God's good time, more fruit can flourish. He prays for them and with them, and is in loving fellowship with them. Would that not be enough? What then is enough? He also sings in the choir and perhaps helps them with certain projects they need. Perhaps he does more than you ever will, even as he rests on the shoulders of giants before him. Perhaps it is you who are misconstruing what fisharmor wrote? I leave it to him to explain, as I am sure he will do so better than I can.
    413 replies | 23858 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:25 PM
    Was Timothy his biological son? He called Timothy his son. That would make Paul a father to him. Since St. Paul had no biological children, and when one reads the words of his epistles, it is clear that he is referencing himself as Timothy's spiritual father. Indeed, as the spiritual father to all in Corinth. This does not mean he put himself above God the Father, which is what Christ warned against.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:24 PM
    Because of writings which include the Holy Scriputres and the writings of the Church Fathers of the apostolic era and afterwards.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:22 PM
    To say this means you have very little understanding of the important roles all members of the body have and how this has been manifested through the life of the Church. All are called to participate, but not all are called to preach.
    413 replies | 23858 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:20 PM
    Moses and Elijiah appeared with Christ and conversed with Him prior to the Ressurection. Would you say they were not members of the Church of Christ?
    413 replies | 23858 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:17 PM
    Please elaborate. :)
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:16 PM
    and how do you know this? I am not saying he did or didn't, I am simply asking how you know.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:16 PM
    When the rich man saw Abraham in heaven with Lazarus in his bossom, and addressed him as "Father Abraham," Abraham's response was not, "Do you not realize that only God the Father is to be called 'father'?" Rather, he replied, "Son, remember. . .
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:11 PM
    Christ also said in Matthew 23 'do not be called teachers', and yet later on He refers to Nicodemus as one. Did Christ contradict Himself? Perhaps the spirit of what Christ is saying (which happens to be the understanding of the Church from the beginning, including St. Paul who called himself the father of those whom he brought the gospel to), is that we are to understand that our Father in Heaven alone is the source of all things, including knowledge and wisdom, and that we should of put no one else above Him or as a replacement, for God alone is the Father. Whether we call our paternal dad 'father' means nothing as long as we understand it is God above through whom all things find being.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:07 PM
    It is not that trusting in scripture is innovative, but rather that trusting in scripture alone which is innovative when judged against the historical writings and witness of the Christian Church going back to the earliest writings. Please don't build strawmen. Ok. Well, is that what the Lord meant? If so, then why the change by you?
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:32 PM
    Trusting only in Scripture is most definitely an innovative doctrine which is completely foreign to the teachings and writings of the Apostles and early Church Fathers. The rest of your post seems like word-play. :) Let's slow things down a little bit... If I call my father 'father', am I sinning against God?
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:56 PM
    Btw, while there are local non-dogmatic traditions which vary from region or nation and ones which change in time and space according to the challenges being faced by the members, the notion that we are to hand on to the teachings of our fathers before us is a fundamental Christian teaching, completely consistent with the history of Israel's relationship with God and the teachings handed down by Christ to His Apostles and the Church. We can say to be wary of traditions which are apart from God, but at the same time we should earnestly seek to find which are the ones which are according to His pleasure. When we put even just a small effort in studying the writings of the early witnesses, we clearly learn how important good traditions are according to Christ and the Apostles, and to the Church Fathers and the Saints of the early Church. A great part, perhaps the very essence, of being a Christian is one of obedience and control over one's own will in order to find the will of God. This includes following the commandments of God and the traditions of God (whether in word or epistle) and no more reliably visible is the will of God discerned than through the Church which is the pillar and foundation of the truth. For it is God Himself working within the Church which gives it such great a power, just as it was God Himself working through the Church in the writing of the Holy Scriptures, which was one part of the fulfillment of the apostolic commission.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:38 PM
    Then why did St. Paul tell his spiritual children to listen to him and to the Apostles? Were they not men? Perhaps because the authority lay not in them, but in the Holy Spirit in them?? And if so, perhaps it is because of the Holy Spirit in them which gives the authority regarding dividing which are good traditions and which are bad.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:34 PM
    Through the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But more specifically, for reasons of this current dialogue, through the Holy Spirit after Christ ascended to be at the Right Hand of the Father.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:21 PM
    I would add that you are correct donnay in that there exist traditions which can be castigated as 'traditions of men' or 'traditions apart from God'. No one is denying this. The question is, how can we know which are the bad traditions which St. Paul is alluding to in some of the quotes above and which are the good traditions which St. Paul is alluding to in the others? Here is a hint: What did the same St. Paul say was the bulwark and foundation for the truth? Perhaps knowing that, we might better know which are the God-inspired traditions beneficial to the Christian and which are not and should be avoided. In one breath, you post a quote which gives the impression that traditions (in general) are bad, and then in another, a quote which speaks to the traditions of the Apostles and how they must be handed down. The question, as asked above, is who or what determines which traditions are beneficial and which are not, which should be discarded and which should of be faithfully followed and handed down?
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:53 PM
    Donnay, you continue to ignore the question I asked you earlier. If we can continue with that dialogue, perhaps we can then move onto the quotes you mention above and discuss how they fit in. I will try again: Did the Apsotles start any traditions?
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:18 PM
    I believe he is referring to those who are singing the psalms and hymns in the liturgical service. The singing of hymns and prayers during common liturgical worship goes back, of course, to a time before the New Testament period. In the early Church, we find this tradition in the Book of Acts. By the second and third century, pious liturgical developments in hymnology and in the ordos of the worship helped formalize a more concrete and universal liturgical formation structured around the apostolic framework which was handed down by the Apostles and those they ordained. This resulted in a more aesthetic and structured service incorporating the talents of select individuals within the Church who led the laity in the antiphonal responses and hymning, as well as in the readings from the Old Testament. Because they chant (or sing) the psalms (which is a tradition which dates back to Jewish practices prior to Christ's Advent), they have been called chanters.
    413 replies | 23858 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:56 PM
    I am not sure what you mean by 'biblical Christianity' but I assume you are referring to the tradition of Sola Scriptura which was started relatively recently. In the Scriptures themselves we find St. Paul calling himself a spiritual father to the believers in Corinth. 1 Corinthians 4:15 For though you might have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. Therefore I urge you, imitate me. For this reason I have sent Timothy to you, who is my beloved and faithful son in the Lord, who will remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church. But I do appreciate your qualification of 'we don't call those who disciple in the faith father'. Yet Jesus didn't say that in Matthew. He said call no man father. Do you believe, therefore, that it is a sin to call your father 'father' regardless if he disciplines you in the faith?
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:32 PM
    He is not a 'friar'. Fr (in this instance) is short for "Father", referring to someone who is ordained a presbyter. The author is an Orthodox Christian. Within the Orthodox Church (as has been since the days of the New Testament), there is no individual sects or varying orders with the ascetic or monastic apart from that of Bishop, Presbyter, Deacon and Laity.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:31 PM
    There are many good points you bring up which I would like to discuss further with you. It is nice to see that you understand that there do exist traditions within the life of the Church and the believers who make up the Church. Christ Himself told His disciples to 'do everything they told them', referring to the holy traditions which where handed down from old. It was the hypocrisy and lack of mercy which Christ rallied against, and not the traditions per say. There are some who take a novel (and modern) blindly 'anti-tradition' stance and do not understand that this has absolutely no place in the life of the Christian and never has been. It is completely against the history of Christianity and the instructive model initiated by the first Apostles and those who followed them. We find many traditions starting in the Acts of the Apostles as well as in the Epistles. The Apostles implored their fellow believers to uphold these traditions and to pass them down. These, were, indeed, rules, and breaking these rules could mean excommunication and sacramental separation from the Holy Eucharist. They took obedience, meekness, and humility very seriously, and this first towards God and then next to those who God elevated as spiritual leaders. If not for traditions which are held fast and guarded, then we see the confusion you are mentioning in even greater degrees. We see this in the current landscape of the modern world, where the traditions are not a few varied, but rather varying in the millions, with individuals affirming their own personal ideas of what is correct and true, and elevating their notions to be the truth. This is indeed a tradition of many modern Christians. And so we have not a unity in faith and worship, but rather a cacophony of individual mental constructs, separated from the eternal truths and beneficial traditions handed down, and limited in scope according to the weakness of men. This tradition, which is related to the OP point regarding the modern egalitarianism so prevalent in this decaying civilization, is more a cause for confusion than any of the ones instituted by the Holy Apostles. Thus, we ask ourselves again, as I ask donnay, 'which are the traditions of men, which are good for nothing, and which are the traditions instituted by God, which are for the good of the Christian life in this world?'
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:07 PM
    Thank you. I understand better now.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:41 PM
    What makes so many people confused is hypocrisy (which is actually what Jesus was reprimanding the Pharisees about when He spoke about traditions) and divisions. When there is steadfastness, virtue, and unity of faith, there is no confusion, which is why St. Paul and the other Apostles labored so hard to bring to the churches spread far and wide to unity in faith and mind and confession and worship, so that in unity they may find God as He is, and not what our mere minds may individually imagine Him to be.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:29 PM
    Good post! I don't clearly understand, however, what you mean by 'the limits of the human heart will try to impose equality on all'. Can you elaborate on this? Thanks!
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
  • TER's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:16 PM
    To keep things more simple, HB, I am referring to the Church we read about in the New Testament and whether any traditions were started by the Apostles. It seems like donnay is anti-tradition. Presumably, it is 'traditions of men' which she is against. Therefore, I would like to learn if she knows whether the Apostles started any traditions or not, and if so, were these mere 'traditions of men' which she claims should be fought against.
    79 replies | 564 view(s)
More Activity

1 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Please help! I'm counting on RPF! http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=251175
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 1 of 1
About Kýrie eléison

Basic Information

Signature


You gently drew the dream as it was: floating, as it goes out. On the other side of the world, it does so, floating, as it goes out.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
96
Posts Per Day
0.04
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
1
Most Recent Message
07-02-2010 07:43 PM
General Information
Last Activity
04-09-2016 08:54 AM
Join Date
02-04-2010
Referrals
0

4 Friends

  1. Inkblots Inkblots is offline

    Member

    Inkblots
  2. Neil Desmond Neil Desmond is offline

    Member

    Neil Desmond
  3. TER TER is offline

    Member

    TER
  4. tremendoustie tremendoustie is offline

    Member

    tremendoustie
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...