Historic Christianity

[Chappie]

It's not my problem your opinion smells of offal.

False teachers have been going out of the church since its inception (1 John 2:18-19). Do you think that those who are led by the Spirit of God cannot detect false teaching?

That is patently not true. Your own signature condemns you as too good for "Protestant[s], Catholic[s], Pentacostal[s], Baptist[s], Charismatic[s], Christadelphian[s], Calvinist[s], and any other denomination." Every one of those groups undoubtedly also "believe[s] the bible every opportunity [they] get." But no, in your infinite wisdom, you're too good for them.
Clever.

Go away Pig...

[robrecht]

Well, kinda so... But the question had to do with schisms in the Church, and Christianity being in schism from Judaism, and mine was Noah in schism from the rest of humanity... The sin of Adam and the fall of Lucifer were both schisms of evil against the Good, but Noah and Christ the reverse...

Not a major point, yes?

Arsenios

For me, personally, I still feel the major point is the most important and most original schism in the church, which occured when the original Jewish Christians were separated from the other sects of Judaism. Imagine if it had not taken place, how much different both Christianity and Judaism would be today. Even if a Jewish sect of Christians had separated from Judaism and continued to exist as part of the larger Christian church, the rest of us would have been so greatly enriched by the contemplation of their perspective. Ultimately, I think both the Church and Judaism lost out, but I feel it only from my individual perspective. My heart burns with the mystery of the God of the Hebrew scriptures in a way that is not nourished in the various Christian churches I have attended over the years.

[robrecht]

Well, kinda so... But the question had to do with schisms in the Church, and Christianity being in schism from Judaism, and mine was Noah in schism from the rest of humanity... The sin of Adam and the fall of Lucifer were both schisms of evil against the Good, but Noah and Christ the reverse...

Not a major point, yes?

Arsenios

Aside from my great love of the Hebrew scriptures, which I mentioned above, I'd still like to hear you expand more upon your ideas about the schism of Noah. Recall also that my earlier biblical narrative of schism was not the fall of Adam & Eve, though one could talk about a schism between men & women that occurred after the fall. I chose the idea of Cain & Abel because their conflict arose over differing manners of worship, did it not?

Thanks, Robrecht

[Sparko]

Well, kinda so... But the question had to do with schisms in the Church, and Christianity being in schism from Judaism, and mine was Noah in schism from the rest of humanity... The sin of Adam and the fall of Lucifer were both schisms of evil against the Good, but Noah and Christ the reverse...

Not a major point, yes?

Arsenios

Not following you...

Noah happened before there was a Judaism. And since the rest of humanity was destroyed in the flood, there was no schism between Noah and the rest of humanity since Noah WAS the rest of humanity.

[Chappie]

It's not my problem your opinion smells of offal.

Smells like OneBad Pig huh?

False teachers have been going out of the church since its inception (1 John 2:18-19). Do you think that those who are led by the Spirit of God cannot detect false teaching?

Shall we ask those that have been subject to false teachings? The Adventists teach different than the Baptists, the reformers have different teachings than the Catholics: ETC., ETC. Do you believe that all are true to scripture? You do know about the law of non contradictions do you not. When two positions are presented with differing conclusions, you do know that both cannot be true don't you. Either there are none lead exclusively by the HS, or the possibility of being deceived remains. Do you not know that false teachings still permeate the Christian community, always has, and always will; right up until the return of Christ.

Also, I hope that you have a much, much better time exegeting the scriptures than you did exegeting my sig...
I am beginning to feel convicted concerning the personal aspect of our interactions, can we move on?

[Rdr. Arsenios]

For me, personally, I still feel the major point is the most important and most original schism in the church, which occured when the original Jewish Christians were separated from the other sects of Judaism. Imagine if it had not taken place, how much different both Christianity and Judaism would be today. Even if a Jewish sect of Christians had separated from Judaism and continued to exist as part of the larger Christian church, the rest of us would have been so greatly enriched by the contemplation of their perspective. Ultimately, I think both the Church and Judaism lost out, but I feel it only from my individual perspective. My heart burns with the mystery of the God of the Hebrew scriptures in a way that is not nourished in the various Christian churches I have attended over the years.

It grieved Paul as well...The choice in the matter was not the Christians', but that of the Jews... The Christians could do nothing to stop their being persecuted, and God gave them a lot of time for repentance, and they remained hardened, until the Temple was destroyed and they were scattered to wander among the Goyim...

But yes, that was the will of God, that they should embrace the Messiah, and even if they had only tolerated Him, and the sect that He had established among them, the world would today be a much better place, no question... Our priest here at our mission is a Jew - An ex-atheist from NYC, now Orthodox Christian... The call to this Faith is normally not apprehended by "attending various churches"... And for you, I would hand you "The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church" by Vladimir Lossky - The first time I picked it up, 4 years ago in Roslyn, WA at my kitchen table with my first cup of coffee on a January 1st, a strong thought came to me as I opened the cover: "This is the Truth." So I read it slow, fully digesting each sentence and paragraph, and was stunned at what it showed, for it placed man in God's creation as higher than creation and lower than God, and then showed just HOW that works out in this Orthodox Christian Faith... However, it's not for everyone... But it just might be for you... It takes a certain bent of brain, I think...

Anyhow, God bless you in your wanderings...

Arsenios

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Aside from my great love of the Hebrew scriptures, which I mentioned above, I'd still like to hear you expand more upon your ideas about the schism of Noah. Recall also that my earlier biblical narrative of schism was not the fall of Adam & Eve, though one could talk about a schism between men & women that occurred after the fall. I chose the idea of Cain & Abel because their conflict arose over differing manners of worship, did it not?

Thanks, Robrecht

Well, it had, I think, to do with the issue of "First Fruits"... Abel gave the first and best of his fruits to God as an offering, and Abel gave the left-overs AFTER he had taken the best for himself... So that it was more than just two forms of worship - It was instead differing offerings to God... The same happened with Ananias and his wife in Acts, when they witheld part of their gift for themselves instead of handing it over to the Apostles as promised...

But Cain killed Abel, and their offspring are with us to this day... In Judaic terms, the Islamics are of Abel, and the Jews of Cain, yes? And the split was that between victim and victimizer, and Christ the ultimate victim in the lineage of Abel... And indeed, Christians follow Christ, and turn the other cheek, permitting themselves to be victimized, and Islam victimizes them regularly...

So that the conflict of good vs evil is laid out first in their story, Cain and Abel... For that is the Fruit of Adam's partaking of the forbidden fruit of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil...

Arsenios

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Not following you...

Noah happened before there was a Judaism. And since the rest of humanity was destroyed in the flood, there was no schism between Noah and the rest of humanity since Noah WAS the rest of humanity.

It is only a Type, and maybe not even a type - You see, when God makes a decision, He carries it out, and He decided to keep a Remnant, eg Noah and his family, and separated them from the rest, for His work on this earth... And when the doors were closed to the Ark, the waters came... But a remnant is perhaps not best seen as a schism... Yet the Apostle's Bible was the Bible of the Jews... The LXX... So I would hesitate to push it very far...

Arsenios

[Sparko]

It is only a Type, and maybe not even a type - You see, when God makes a decision, He carries it out, and He decided to keep a Remnant, eg Noah and his family, and separated them from the rest, for His work on this earth... And when the doors were closed to the Ark, the waters came... But a remnant is perhaps not best seen as a schism... Yet the Apostle's Bible was the Bible of the Jews... The LXX... So I would hesitate to push it very far...

Arsenios

OK. Thanks

[Pilgrim]

Back to the OP. None of this speaks to history in any meaningful way. It's all about doctrine and theology etc. The statement, "The historic church is historically wrong" is as near to being nonsensical as I can find.

[robrecht]

It grieved Paul as well...The choice in the matter was not the Christians', but that of the Jews... The Christians could do nothing to stop their being persecuted, and God gave them a lot of time for repentance, and they remained hardened, until the Temple was destroyed and they were scattered to wander among the Goyim...

But yes, that was the will of God, that they should embrace the Messiah, and even if they had only tolerated Him, and the sect that He had established among them, the world would today be a much better place, no question... Our priest here at our mission is a Jew - An ex-atheist from NYC, now Orthodox Christian... The call to this Faith is normally not apprehended by "attending various churches"... And for you, I would hand you "The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church" by Vladimir Lossky - The first time I picked it up, 4 years ago in Roslyn, WA at my kitchen table with my first cup of coffee on a January 1st, a strong thought came to me as I opened the cover: "This is the Truth." So I read it slow, fully digesting each sentence and paragraph, and was stunned at what it showed, for it placed man in God's creation as higher than creation and lower than God, and then showed just HOW that works out in this Orthodox Christian Faith... However, it's not for everyone... But it just might be for you... It takes a certain bent of brain, I think...

Anyhow, God bless you in your wanderings...

Arsenios

Thanks for the Lossky recommendation; I'll keep an eye out for it. A very good friend of mine was an Orthodox priest and I've done a little reading of some of the Eastern fathers, all of it years ago so that most of it is forgotten except the most important parts that have stayed with me. There are several aspects of Orthodox theology that I favor over the Western approach.

[robrecht]

Well, it had, I think, to do with the issue of "First Fruits"... Abel gave the first and best of his fruits to God as an offering, and Abel gave the left-overs AFTER he had taken the best for himself... So that it was more than just two forms of worship - It was instead differing offerings to God... The same happened with Ananias and his wife in Acts, when they witheld part of their gift for themselves instead of handing it over to the Apostles as promised...

But Cain killed Abel, and their offspring are with us to this day... In Judaic terms, the Islamics are of Abel, and the Jews of Cain, yes? And the split was that between victim and victimizer, and Christ the ultimate victim in the lineage of Abel... And indeed, Christians follow Christ, and turn the other cheek, permitting themselves to be victimized, and Islam victimizes them regularly...

So that the conflict of good vs evil is laid out first in their story, Cain and Abel... For that is the Fruit of Adam's partaking of the forbidden fruit of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil...

Arsenios

That there was some deficiency in Cain's sacrifice might be inferred from the fuller description of Abel's sacrifice, but it is not said that Cain gave the leftovers after keeping the best for himself. There is a midrash with that interpretation. Nor are we told how Cain and Abel knew God's regard for the second sacrifice but not for the first. God will indeed ask Cain why he is upset. Maybe Abel boasted of his better way of worship and criticized the offering of the poor farmer? And where did they get the idea to offer sacrifices to God in the first place? God had not yet commanded any sacrifices. I suspect God would have preferred that no sacrifices had been given if only that would have avoided the murder and the schism between Cain and his parents and later Seth.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

That there was some deficiency in Cain's sacrifice might be inferred from the fuller description of Abel's sacrifice, but it is not said that Cain gave the leftovers after keeping the best for himself. There is a midrash with that interpretation. Nor are we told how Cain and Abel knew God's regard for the second sacrifice but not for the first. God will indeed ask Cain why he is upset. Maybe Abel boasted of his better way of worship and criticized the offering of the poor farmer? And where did they get the idea to offer sacrifices to God in the first place? God had not yet commanded any sacrifices. I suspect God would have preferred that no sacrifices had been given if only that would have avoided the murder and the schism between Cain and his parents and later Seth.

This was before the flood, and little is known - We can assume God knew their hearts, which was reflected in their deeds... The choice of Adam to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil causing the expulsion of him and Eve from the Garden pretty much forces the two sons to be at enmity... The key word is good AND evil, you see... Which forces a rendering of the two, because in God is no evil at all...

Arsenios

[themuzicman]

The original divide came with the Oriental Orthodox and the Coptic [Egyptian] Orthodox from the original Communion of the Church, and this schism is now being seriously called into question as an authentic division... It is hard indeed to discern any difference between the praxis and the theology of these with the EOs... The REAL schism came when the Pope tried to subject the Church under Christ through the Ecumenical Councils to himself and his Latin/western See... The rest is the insanity can be traced to this event, and is predominantly a consequence of it... For all the rest are but the helter-skelter development of the Great Schism between the Latin/western See of Rome from all the other Patriarchates and Her attempts to establish Herself and Her Pope in rulership by force over them... The rest confess Christ as the Ruler of the Church on earth and in the heavens, and do NOT confess the See of Peter and the "Chair" of Peter as the Head of the Church in Christ's place (eg the Vicar - as in vicarious - of Christ)...

It was the heretical and schismatic excesses of Latin Rome that birthed the Protestant "Reformation", and pandemonium after that...

So that, my dear Chapster, the situation is not so dire as it may seem to you...

You really only have the Great Schism...

And her illegitimate children 500 years later...

Born of the printing press...

Clinging to unlimited interpretations...

Of the unlimited printing press Bible...

All according to each person's logic...

In dogmatic defiance of Latin Rome...

The historic and Apostolic Church has NOTHING like this...

We had Rome... And a division without much of a difference with the Oriental Orthodox...

Latin Rome built Pandora's box for 500 years...

And opened it with the Latin Monk Luther...

The rest is demon-fest...

Arsenios

Would that include the 50 or so years between 330 and 381 when the Eastern Church was Arian?

[robrecht]

This was before the flood, and little is known - We can assume God knew their hearts, which was reflected in their deeds... The choice of Adam to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil causing the expulsion of him and Eve from the Garden pretty much forces the two sons to be at enmity... The key word is good AND evil, you see... Which forces a rendering of the two, because in God is no evil at all...

Arsenios

I see the story as most likely being written down and shaped by people who already had an appreciation of a value in animal sacrifice, which I do not share, by the way.

It is interesting that Cain was in some ways more affected by the expulsion than Abel. That may help explain his insecurity. There's also a midrashic theme that explains and mitigates the Earth’s culpability in swallowing Abel's blood to help conceal the crime. It was accepted that the Earth might feel a sense of obligation to Cain, who was more devoted to the Earth.