• erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 06:05 PM
    To be fair, so does Ron Paul.
    40 replies | 643 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 05:52 PM
    You're lucky. "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Brian4Liberty again." You just lied. I don't claim to speak for Ron Paul, ever, much less constantly. I do make statements about what he himself has said he believes (don't you?). And as I said, this site has a mission that is explicitly written out. I have as much right to talk about that as you do. And, as you're proving, you have no hesitation in speaking for this site. It looks like you're just trying to gloss over the fact that, whereas I am in general agreement with Ron Paul and this site's mission, including when it comes to immigration and trade, you aren't (again, you yourself, just like Ron Paul and the official published mission of this site, have put your views on this out there). Is the reason you love the Trump trolls so much because you agree with them on those issues?
    136 replies | 1871 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 05:19 PM
    But do you choose them based on their value in resolving the historical question we're asking, or based on their support for the position you want to support? Because when it comes to the beliefs Patrick of Ireland, what sources trump the writings of Patrick of Ireland?
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 05:15 PM
    Actually, no, he wasn't. And we have his own writings to consult on that matter.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 05:14 PM
    You say "name them" as if you would expect me to name all of them. Yes, Ignatius, Irenaeus, and Cyril were professing Christians. The true model for churches isn't from the second century, but from the first. And historically speaking there is no one single model of second-century Christian churches. Christianity at that time was very diverse, and its churches fit many different models, some conforming more closely to the tradition of the apostles than others. I should also say that I don't think the apostles set forth a very strict single model of church organization that all churches must follow. Their dictates left room for variation. But we do know that they didn't ordain any bishops over whole cities. Their own writings show this. And when Ignatius wrote his letters in the early second century, we can see from them that the monarchical bishop model he favored was apparently a relatively new thing that was not very widely accepted, and he had his work cut out for him helping to establish it. It's clear from his tendentiousness that alongside those believers that recognized the city-wide authority of the bishops he endorsed were many others who did not. Incidentally, in his arguing for the special position to be held by the monarchical bishops in Asia Minor that he endorsed, he never once pretended that this model went back to the apostles. Nor did he appeal to apostolic succession for the bishops whom he endorsed, nor did he claim it for himself.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 05:08 PM
    This is a great example. It was Patrick of Ireland who brought Christianity there, and he ordained elders. But he himself didn't have apostolic succession. His calling to that ministry came (at least as he understood it) directly from Jesus through a spiritual encounter. Contemporary with him, Pope Celestine sent Palladius as an ordained bishop to Ireland, and he found a population that was already Christian, complete with elders, who opposed him and did not want to come under his leadership. Irish Christianity developed from the ministry of Patrick, not Palladius, and it took centuries for Rome to get control over it.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:59 PM
    I can't look into their hearts and say who had genuine saving faith, thus belonging to the universal invisible Church that the apostles established. But sure, I can name some people who outwardly aligned themselves with the visible Church. Whether any given one of these people were genuine members of the Church is something only God knows, and I leave it to him to say.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:57 PM
    Never. That still happens. Understand, though, that according to the apostolic model what you are calling priests and bishops are just two names for one office. Those words come from transliteration of presbyteros and episkopos. But if we translated them instead of transliterating them, they just mean elder and overseer. Another word that the apostles used for that same office was poimenos, which means shepherd or pastor. I don't know of any churches that don't have these offices in some form.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:54 PM
    In the only sense that any apostolic succession can actually reliably be asserted, all Christians have it. Everyone alive today who believes the Gospel learned it from someone who learned it from someone who learned it from someone, eventually going back to the apostles. On the other hand, in the sense you mean, that the there is an unbroken chain of bishops ordained by bishops ordained by bishops, going back to bishops who were ordained by the apostles, the problem is not that such a thing doesn't exist. It probably does. And I see no reason to deny that it really does apply to many elders in today's Presbyterian churches. The problem is, it can never be demonstrated. Nobody can ever say that any given bishop has this succession or doesn't. There do not exist reliable lists of these chains of ordination going all the way back to the apostles. Those who claim to have such lists always end up relying on unreliable lists comprised no earlier than the mid-second century, by church historians like Hegesippus, who (provided they weren't being outright dishonest) mistakenly assumed that the models of church leadership of earlier generations had to be the same as what they experienced in their own days, which we can prove not to be the case. Even in the apostles' own age, churches were starting up all over the world, faster than the apostles and elder/bishops ordained by them could keep up with. The apostles had no requirement that these elder/bishops had to have been ordained by apostles or by a chain of elder/bishops going back to the apostles, in order to be legitimate or to go on to ordain other elder/bishops themselves.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:28 PM
    Your first sentence is true. Your second is false. In the age of the apostles, "bishop" and "elder" were just two different words for the same thing. There was no such thing as a bishop of a city. The fact that such things are part of the essence of Eastern Orthodoxy is additional proof that the apostolic Church was not the same thing as it. And the apostles didn't give these bishop/elders the authority to get together in a small group of just a few hundred and claim that their group was a "Holy Ecumenical Council." In truth, there has never been an ecumenical council comprised of anyone other than the apostles themselves (the only Christian leaders ever to have authority over the whole universal Church), only local councils, with some being bigger than others.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:25 PM
    It never went anywhere. It's still here. It's comprised of everyone with saving faith in Jesus Christ, regardless what denominational organization they may belong to. Those denominations (of which Eastern Orthodoxy is just one) are many and come and go. But there is just one Church.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:18 PM
    How's that working out for you? Has turning this site into a hive of Trump trolls improved the discourse and made it more intellectually functional?
    136 replies | 1871 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:12 PM
    In addition to the guidelines is a mission statement. And among the guidelines you neglected to mention are some requiring no supporting of agendas counter to our mission and no supporting of mission-supporting activism efforts. Also, note that even in the part you copied and pasting about the use of the word troll, it is presented in a context of replying to arguments. You can't say, "Here are the problems with your line of thinking," when there is no line of thinking but just pure trolling. And who do you think you are anyway, telling me I can't speak for this forum but you can?
    136 replies | 1871 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:04 PM
    Wow. When did the troll part get added to that? What's the point of having this website if we can't even criticize people for trolling? As I see it, if people don't want to be called trolls, they shouldn't troll.
    136 replies | 1871 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 03:44 PM
    That's not what I was hearing. I kept hearing about how the polls showed Brexit could win but they had to be wrong for one reason or another. But nope, they were right after all.
    35 replies | 455 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 02:58 PM
    Like many historical things, it was a development that didn't have just one single starting point. There were a series of watershed moments that can be debated as to which were more or less significant. If I have to pick a single event, I would pick either the Qunisext Council in the late 7th century or the Second Council of Nicaea in the 8th century. In the former case, its significance is that it's when the Pentarchy, which is a defining feature of Eastern Orthodox as it has come to be defined since then (parallel to the Pope for Roman Catholics), came about. In the latter case, I would say that, since it's the most recent council that Eastern Orthodox consider to be ecumenical, and so agreement with it must be a sine qua non of Eastern Orthodoxy, and of course it could not have been a sine qua non of Christianity before that time since it hadn't happened yet, and (as we can easily demonstrate) many earlier fathers, even among those who are revered as saints in Eastern Orthodoxy, wouldn't have accepted its dogmas. Another way I might approach it would be to go back to when a more unified organization out of which both Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy developed and went their separate ways. Looked at this way I would probably pick the tenure of Pope Gregory the Great around AD 600, since he, more than anyone else, moved the papacy toward the pretense of authority over the universal church that is such a defining feature of Roman Catholicism.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 02:04 PM
    Let's start with a more basic question. Why aren't there a bazillion Jesus followers, period? One reason is that bazillion is not a number. I'm not sure, but I think it might be a kind of wax or something. Ladies, did I get that right?
    70 replies | 1125 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 02:01 PM
    I realize that that's the standard propaganda you learn from EO apologists. But there's no historical basis for it that would be recognizable to any objective observer. In order for you to say that, you have to either redefine Eastern Orthodoxy so as to allow it to include churches that fail to exhibit features that today's Eastern Orthodox claim are essential to that denomination, or else you have to make believe things about history that just aren't true.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 01:52 PM
    Yes. I already have refuted it. In truth, Jews only made up about 5% of all of the above groups. You already proved my point. You never studied this critically. You just copied and pasted what you got from a racist source, and when you finally did provide your source after repeatedly avoiding it, you proved I was right about it.
    136 replies | 1871 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 01:50 PM
    You say you are honest about enforcing the guidelines. But you're really only honest about enforcing your make believe version of them. The published guidelines include nothing about calling trolls trolls. Conspicuously, you don't deny that they are trolls. Nobody should have to go tattling to mods every time some troll trolls here. We who stand for what this site claims to stand for (it remains to be seen if it really still does) should be allowed to take matters into our own hands by humiliating and mocking trolls until they run away with their tails between their legs, just like has always been done here. If you want to have guidelines that say we can't do that any more, then stick your neck out and change the guidelines. As you can tell, I and many others here virulently disagree with you on this. So does the history of this site. So do the published site guidelines.
    136 replies | 1871 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 11:58 AM
    How will the federal government grow if the population it rules over has zero people in it?
    33 replies | 396 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 11:57 AM
    First of all, that's a redundant question. The 7th day sabbath is the only sabbath. There is no other one. The very passage you just quoted says that as clearly as can be. And I am saying Christians are not bound to it.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 11:43 AM
    If "America" is the federal government, then that's a point in her favor.
    33 replies | 396 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 11:41 AM
    I agree that early Christian setting apart of the 1st day was primarily in remembrance of the resurrection. But we have absolutely zero evidence that any early Christians (at least throughout the first two centuries) thought of this as a sabbath, and abundant evidence that they distinguished it from the sabbath.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 11:39 AM
    According to the very passage you quoted, if you don't observe the Sabbath on the 7th day, then what you're doing is not observing the Sabbath, but something else.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 11:17 AM
    The day he rested was the 7th (which is incidentally, also the day Jesus rested immediately before his resurrection). That is a historic fact that will never change. The sabbath law was never just to rest one day out of 7, but to rest on the same day God did, the 7th. If that's not the day you're resting, then you're not observing the sabbath law. The apostle did treat the sabbath command as not obligatory. But they never suggested that the sabbath day could ever be any other day than the 7th. Nor did they relate it in any way to the Lord's Day.
    154 replies | 1647 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 11:08 AM
    I tend to agree with this. The truth is, thanks to his ineffectiveness, we haven't done as badly under Obama, at least in his 2nd term, as we have under most presidents. A point in favor of Trump might be that, as terrible as his policies are, he may be even more ineffective than Obama. Unfortunately, that's hard to predict.
    33 replies | 396 view(s)
  • erowe1's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 10:51 AM
    This is another reason to be cautious about the label anarchist. Traditionally, socialism has been so endemic to anarchism as to be almost an essential part of it. Anarcho-capitalism is a recent development that even today makes up a small minority of anarchists. And outside of libertarian circles, to call oneself an anarchist would often lead people to assume you're a socialist.
    25 replies | 519 view(s)
More Activity

3 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Thank you for being understanding.
  2. View Conversation
    Hi Indi Pol,
    Read your post. Everything you said is being felt or has been felt by many of us. I just wanted you to know you are surrounded by like-feeling people here. Perhaps we come here to help one another as much as Dr. Paul. I have carried a similar burden of feelings around for years. It is sad, indeed, that Dr. Paul feels the need to carry this burden, but it is something he has to do or he would not. We must do what we must do to help him. Be of good cheer. It will be alright. We are family and we love liberty.
  3. View Conversation
    Hey, it's good to hear from you. It's nice to be up-to-date on what the campaign and the grassroots are doing...especially as we near the Ames, Iowa straw Poll on august 13th. Be sure to watch the debate on August 11th, fox News 9pm EST.

    How are you though? I've been on vacation all summer long. Jumping from place to place visiting people and going on retreats and stuff. How about you? I haven't been doing much at all on my youtube channel, It's kinda sad, but I don't know if I'll have the time to do anything on it. i have SO many stories and series I'd like to make with LEGO stop motion but it's a tedious process. I'm not sure where I'm heading. All I know is that I'm going to be a Junior in high school next year and I'm going to try and do my very best at school (without questioning the broken system of it) - which I've never done before. All I pray is that God guides my paths, grants me wisdom and peace, closing doors and opening others.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 3 of 3
About IndianaPolitico

Basic Information

About IndianaPolitico
Occupation:
Lawn Mowing....
Political Campaign Skills
Campaign Workers:
Phone Bank Worker
Copywriters:
Typing
Graphics:
Graphic Designer
Video and Audio:
Videographer, Video Producer

Signature


Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,695
Posts Per Day
1.41
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
3
Most Recent Message
11-20-2011 10:26 AM
General Information
Last Activity
04-22-2016 07:43 PM
Join Date
04-07-2011
Referrals
0

4 Friends

  1. Carole Carole is offline

    Member

    Carole
  2. erowe1 erowe1 is offline

    Temporary Ban

    erowe1
  3. R3volutionJedi R3volutionJedi is offline

    Member

    R3volutionJedi
  4. radiofriendly radiofriendly is offline

    Member

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