A book every Christian needs to read.

[Scotth1960]

The Bible is a book every Christian needs to read.
A book besides the Bible that you need to read to understand the meaning of John 15:26-27, is the following book. Remember: this is solid meat, spiritual meat, and not spiritual milk. It is a book that whatever your spiritual maturity or immaturity, it will be beyond our finite capacity to understand. We don't need to understand every biblical doctrine to believe a biblical doctrine. We just need to believe the truth (John 16:13) that God teaches us.
See:
SAINT PHOTIOS. (1987). The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit. Translation and Introduction by Joseph P. Farrell. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press.
www.holycrossbookstore.com
ISBN 0-916586-88-X
God have mercy on us. Amen.
Scott in Erie PA

 

[serpentslayer]

A book besides the Bible that you need to read to understand the meaning of John 15:26-27, is the following book.

You just don't get it if you think God needed someone else to wrote another book which would explain
HIS OWN - the HOLY BIBLE. It seems to me that you still put your faith in what a man says is the Truth
instead of praying to GOD and reading His book to get it. Remember Rom 3:4 and Eccl 12.

 

[juliet84]

You just don't get it if you think God needed someone else to wrote another book which would explain
HIS OWN - the HOLY BIBLE. It seems to me that you still put your faith in what a man says is the Truth
instead of praying to GOD and reading His book to get it. Remember Rom 3:4 and Eccl 12.

Whats wrong with having another reference to understand the meaning? Why do we need a Bible study then if everyone understands the exact meaning?

 

[Strangelove]

A Thread every Christian needs to read:

LINK>>> Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism). (It most certainly is!)

You must first defend your temple sect before comtinuing with your porpaganda Scotty.

 

[serpentslayer]

Whats wrong with having another reference to understand the meaning? Why do we need a Bible study then if everyone understands the exact meaning?

Nothing wrong with outside sources; but, we must always check those sources against
the Truth (Bible) because it can never fail. If you believe what another says is the Truth
(like Eve Did) without checking it against the Bible, you set yourself up for deception,
possibly. Personally, once i read Prov23:23, Eccl 12, and Rom 3:4, i realized that i could
and should put my faith in GOD to reveal to me the Truth through studying HIS WORD,
and not through mans' writings. Is it not written that if you lack anything the Holy Spirit
will help you with it, and, the Holy Spirit is the one who leads men into all
understanding? Then one can learn the Truth on their own if they believe the Bible and
study IT to show themselves approved.

Bible studies are good but not necessary to learn the Truth.

 

[Scotth1960]

You just don't get it if you think God needed someone else to wrote another book which would explain
HIS OWN - the HOLY BIBLE. It seems to me that you still put your faith in what a man says is the Truth
instead of praying to GOD and reading His book to get it. Remember Rom 3:4 and Eccl 12.

Friend, I don't put my faith in what you say is the truth if you say it's in "the Bible alone". You haven't proven that reading the Bible alone by yourself will automatically and inevitably lead you to the truths of the Word of God. Using "the Bible alone", the Protestants are, each of them, divided into some 38,000 and more human, man -made traditions of men/ denominations. It all started when the pope of Rome in 1014 AD, the Roman catholic pope was the first Protestant, started saying, "on his own authority" (sic), "Who proceedeth from the Father" AND THE SON (FILIOQUE). (!)
If you want the truth, you need Bibles you can believe in and trust.
If you want to know what Romans 3:4 and Ecclesiastes 12 have to say in context, see:
Orthodox Study Bible. Edited by Fr. Jack N. Sparks, Ph.D., Dean, St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology, Elk Grove, CA. Copyright 2008. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Bibles.
Orthodox New Testament. 2 volumes. Volume 1, The Holy Gospels, Volume 1, Evangelistarion. Volume 2, Acts, Epistles, Revelation, Praxapostolos. Copyright 2000, Holy Apostles Convent, Buena Vista, CO. Available from Amazon.com at GOOGLE.
Before you read these Bibles. you should first read this book:
Gillquist, Fr. Peter E. (1992). Becoming Orthodox: A Journey to the Ancient Christian Faith. Ben Lomond, CA: Conciliar Press.
God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Scotth1960]

A Thread every Christian needs to read:

LINK>>> Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism). (It most certainly is!)

You must first defend your temple sect before comtinuing with your porpaganda Scotty.

Dear friend, I am done dialoguing with you if you persist in demagoguery. You can't even spell propaganda right. You are rushing so fast you make errors. God bless you! Anyway, saying EO is a temple sect does not make it a temple sect. It's impossible for that to be, for there would have to be a Jewish temple for it to be a temple sect. Well, the remnants of the Jewish temple still exist, and Orthodox Jews still venerate the wall in Jerusalem. But the EOC doesn't pray at the wall in Jerusalem.
Your words are totally false and you seem quite incapable of discerning what the truth is. Your mind is too steeped in its own error. I know. I used to be lost in a myriad of heresies and sins. Slowly, gradually, God is saving me, and He has forgiven me for my past sins. God do the same for all of us here: God save us and forgive us all, and bring us to His Church. Where the true Christ will be found. Amen.
God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

 

[NitzWalsh]

Dear friend, I am done dialoguing with you if you persist in demagoguery. You can't even spell propaganda right. You are rushing so fast you make errors. God bless you! Anyway, saying EO is a temple sect does not make it a temple sect. It's impossible for that to be, for there would have to be a Jewish temple for it to be a temple sect. Well, the remnants of the Jewish temple still exist, and Orthodox Jews still venerate the wall in Jerusalem. But the EOC doesn't pray at the wall in Jerusalem.
Your words are totally false and you seem quite incapable of discerning what the truth is. Your mind is too steeped in its own error. I know. I used to be lost in a myriad of heresies and sins. Slowly, gradually, God is saving me, and He has forgiven me for my past sins. God do the same for all of us here: God save us and forgive us all, and bring us to His Church. Where the true Christ will be found. Amen.
God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

I want to see you answer his questions for my own satisfaction... instead of attacking his spelling.

 

[NitzWalsh]

Friend, I don't put my faith in what you say is the truth if you say it's in "the Bible alone". You haven't proven that reading the Bible alone by yourself will automatically and inevitably lead you to the truths of the Word of God. Using "the Bible alone", the Protestants are, each of them, divided into some 38,000 and more human, man -made traditions of men/ denominations. It all started when the pope of Rome in 1014 AD, the Roman catholic pope was the first Protestant, started saying, "on his own authority" (sic), "Who proceedeth from the Father" AND THE SON (FILIOQUE). (!)
If you want the truth, you need Bibles you can believe in and trust.
If you want to know what Romans 3:4 and Ecclesiastes 12 have to say in context, see:
Orthodox Study Bible. Edited by Fr. Jack N. Sparks, Ph.D., Dean, St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology, Elk Grove, CA. Copyright 2008. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Bibles.
Orthodox New Testament. 2 volumes. Volume 1, The Holy Gospels, Volume 1, Evangelistarion. Volume 2, Acts, Epistles, Revelation, Praxapostolos. Copyright 2000, Holy Apostles Convent, Buena Vista, CO. Available from Amazon.com at GOOGLE.
Before you read these Bibles. you should first read this book:
Gillquist, Fr. Peter E. (1992). Becoming Orthodox: A Journey to the Ancient Christian Faith. Ben Lomond, CA: Conciliar Press.
God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

You're trying to get people on a website that the majority of members identify as protestant to read this book, and then you ridicule protestants, I don't think you're doing a very good job of promoting your beliefs.

 

[Scotth1960]

I want to see you answer his questions for my own satisfaction... instead of attacking his spelling.

Dear NitzWalsh, The simple truth is he believes the true church is a certain one of the 38,000 plus different Protestant denominations that have arisen since 1517 AD. For his belief to be true, there must not have been a true church until the time of the Protestant Reformation. All of the Protestants pride themselves that they are non-Catholic, that is, they are not papists. But all of the ideas of every Protestant sect come from a reforming of papism. Thus, if as the Protestants at least used to say, "The papacy of Rome is the Antichrist", then they are also saying "let's reform it (the papacy)", what you end up with is not the Church Christ founded, but a Reformed Antichrist sect of men. A tradition of men. If papism is a tradition of men (and it is!), then Protestantism must be a tradition of men, because Protestantism comes from Papism. And the pope of Rome in 1014 AD was the first Protestant Reformer, who said, "who proceedeth from the Father" AND THE SON (FILIOQUE)! By saying FILIOQUE, he reformed and revised (ADDED TO) the Bible in 1014 AD in Rome. Following Augustine of Hippo's theology rather than the New Testament text in John 15:26.
None of the Church Fathers believed in the solas of the Reformation. The only sola they did believe in was Soli Deo Gloria, to God alone be the glory. But they didn't believe in sola scriptura or in sola fide.
He offers no proof from the Church Fathers that the Church is a "temple cult". For it to be true, it would have to be believed by the Church Fathers, as the Church Fathers were the first Christians after the death of the 12 apostles. St. Justin Martyr, St. Polycarp, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St.Irenaeus, and so on, were among the earliest Christians after the end of the New Testament era in 100 AD.
If Eastern Orthodoxy is not the true Church, then what group of Christians is the true Church? And where are the writings of the true Christians from the first 300 years after the NT era? Between 100 AD and 400 AD? If Strangelove's belief is the true belief, he should be able to produce writings from the people who wrote in the ancient languages of Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Arabic, Ethiopic (Ge'ez), Georgian, Aramaic, and any other of the ancient languages that early Christians wrote in.
God bless you in your quest for truth! Amen. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Scotth1960]

You're trying to get people on a website that the majority of members identify as protestant to read this book, and then you ridicule protestants, I don't think you're doing a very good job of promoting your beliefs.

NitzWalsh, True enough that perhaps I can do better. I want to do better in living a normal Christian life. What I haven't done is believe in sola Scriptura. The Protestants on this site all quote the Bible, out of context, by the way, but they all fail to show their doctrine was believed in the first 1000 years of Church history. If it wasn't believed and then written down somewhere between 100 AD and 1000 AD, it can't be the true belief of the undivided Church. There was only one Catholic Church until 1054 AD. The heresies were all defeated and expelled from the Orthodox Church until 1054, when a large part of the Western Church followed the pope of Rome into schism and into heresies.
I do not ridicule Protestants. I speak against Protestantism. I'm not attacking Protestants personally. I'm saying their doctrines, SOME of their doctrines, are false. If they take it personally, that's not something I'm responsible for. I can't control how people get emotional and react to my statements. I don't ever use personal language or call people nasty names. But people who disagree with Eastern Orthodoxy use the word sect and cult, and I never call Protestants names. Protestantism is sectarianism par excellence, and I'm merely describing the disunited reality of 38,000 competing, growing sects which all have the same premise: "by the Bible alone", and not one of them agrees completely 100 percent with the other on what the Bible teaches or means to say.
God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington
PS A belief can be true if it wasn't written down somewhere. But, by and large, the Church Fathers all wrote some things, though much of what Christians believed in the first 1000 years was passed down mainly through word of mouth, and not always all written down in every church.

 

[NitzWalsh]

NitzWalsh, True enough that perhaps I can do better. I want to do better in living a normal Christian life. What I haven't done is believe in sola Scriptura. The Protestants on this site all quote the Bible, out of context, by the way, but they all fail to show their doctrine was believed in the first 1000 years of Church history. If it wasn't believed and then written down somewhere between 100 AD and 1000 AD, it can't be the true belief of the undivided Church. There was only one Catholic Church until 1054 AD. The heresies were all defeated and expelled from the Orthodox Church until 1054, when a large part of the Western Church followed the pope of Rome into schism and into heresies.
I do not ridicule Protestants. I speak against Protestantism. I'm not attacking Protestants personally. I'm saying their doctrines, SOME of their doctrines, are false. If they take it personally, that's not something I'm responsible for. I can't control how people get emotional and react to my statements. I don't ever use personal language or call people nasty names. But people who disagree with Eastern Orthodoxy use the word sect and cult, and I never call Protestants names. Protestantism is sectarianism par excellence, and I'm merely describing the disunited reality of 38,000 competing, growing sects which all have the same premise: "by the Bible alone", and not one of them agrees completely 100 percent with the other on what the Bible teaches or means to say.
God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington
PS A belief can be true if it wasn't written down somewhere. But, by and large, the Church Fathers all wrote some things, though much of what Christians believed in the first 1000 years was passed down mainly through word of mouth, and not always all written down in every church.

The problem with that is most of those 38000 sects don't say their little group is the one true one, at least the ones I've come across... Most of them say that the church isn't a physical organization but that the church is the body of true believers, regardless of what little group they belong to. It doesn't matter if they agree 100% with each other on every little detail.

I personally have no faith in a lot of the early "Church Fathers" when they introduce false teachings and absorb pagan religious practices.

Also if you want to nag about differences in teachings among protestant groups you should take a look at the EO and the Catholic church history that clearly shows an evolving doctrinal system that introduces new beliefs and practices.

For example, certain titles applied to Mary like Queen of Heaven which was adopted from a number of pagan religions that were absorbed into the Catholic Church.

So I'm going to go ahead and say your arguments are pretty much baseless.

 

[Strangelove]

Still waiting Scotty:

Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism).

 

[Scotth1960]

Still waiting Scotty:

Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism).

Still waiting for you to give evidence you have made years of study of Talmud Pharisaism and then years of study of Eastern Orthodox Church Fathers. And then see whether or not they are exactly the same. I learned from my study of Michael Hoffman and then reading some of the Church Fathers like Saint Basil, Saint Photios, Saint Gregory Nyssa, and, like I said, Michael Hoffman's book "Judaism's Strange Gods" that they are not the same. There are no words that are identical in the Talmud with the words in the Church Fathers.
Still waiting for you to know and say the truth.
Have you read John 15:26?

 

[Strangelove]

Still waiting for you to give evidence you have made years of study of Talmud Pharisaism and then years of study of Eastern Orthodox Church Fathers. And then see whether or not they are exactly the same. I learned from my study of Michael Hoffman and then reading some of the Church Fathers like Saint Basil, Saint Photios, Saint Gregory Nyssa, and, like I said, Michael Hoffman's book "Judaism's Strange Gods" that they are not the same. There are no words that are identical in the Talmud with the words in the Church Fathers.
Still waiting for you to know and say the truth.
Have you read John 15:26?

Do you talk to Saint Basil ??

How do you know he hears you?

You could be engaging in consultation with familiar spirits...

..talking to a dead guy. Is that wise?

 

[Scotth1960]

The problem with that is most of those 38000 sects don't say their little group is the one true one, at least the ones I've come across... Most of them say that the church isn't a physical organization but that the church is the body of true believers, regardless of what little group they belong to. It doesn't matter if they agree 100% with each other on every little detail.

I personally have no faith in a lot of the early "Church Fathers" when they introduce false teachings and absorb pagan religious practices.

Also if you want to nag about differences in teachings among protestant groups you should take a look at the EO and the Catholic church history that clearly shows an evolving doctrinal system that introduces new beliefs and practices.

For example, certain titles applied to Mary like Queen of Heaven which was adopted from a number of pagan religions that were absorbed into the Catholic Church.

So I'm going to go ahead and say your arguments are pretty much baseless.

Dear friend,
The Church Fathers, except for Augustine, didn't absorb pagan religious practices, or introduce false teachings. It is totally false to say EO is an evolving doctrinal system. That's Catholicism. If you do an objective study of church history, you would see that EO does not change. It was Catholicism that introduced innovations and heresies. Orthodoxy fought and excommunicated every heresy.
As for Protestantism, they claim that there is such a thing as a "non church" and that the church is not visible, so they are claiming they have the truth on this. So they believe they are preaching the gospel.
If they say the church is a body of true believers, they must have some criterion by which they judge which body is the true believers.
They claim one of the Protestant groups is the real thing. Luther claimed the true church is the one that teaches justification by faith alone. For Luther, justification by faith alone is the criterion "by which the church [Lutheran] stands or falls." So if justification by faith alone is false, the Lutheran "church" is false.
God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington PS The title queen of heaven is not a pagan title, it comes from Psalm 45. And other teachings in the Bible. Just because the Bible says there was a pagan thing called queen of heaven, does not automatically prove it is wrong to call the Virgin Mary the queen of heaven.

 

[Scotth1960]

Do you talk to Saint Basil ??

How do you know he hears you?

You could be engaging in consultation with familiar spirits...

..talking to a dead guy. Is that wise?

Do you think Saint Paul is dead? Then why are you reading most of the New Testament. It was written by a dead man. Why would you want to listen to the words of a dead man? Isn't that getting into contact with the dead?
I don't try to get messages from Saint Paul or Saint Basil. I rely on their writings. We pray to God through the saints, and so, I ask you this: How do you know God hears you? If God hears us, and the saints are alive in heaven, can't God's saints be told by God what we pray?
Do you think God is keeping a secret from His Church in heaven?
Have you read Revelation? Don't you hear what Revelation says? The saints praying before the throne of God? Don't you think they are praying for the Church on earth? Why wouldn't they do that?

 

[Scotth1960]

A Thread every Christian needs to read:

LINK>>> Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism). (It most certainly is!)

You must first defend your temple sect before comtinuing with your porpaganda Scotty.

Friend,
John 15:26 shows that EO is teaching the true Gospel about the Holy Trinity. Much of Christendom falsifies or ignores this key text.
You would not call EO if you read John 15:26 and the history of the Filioque controversy. It is one of the key things that shows EO understands and believes the Bible.

For further reading: If you want the truth, you need books that will show you what the Bible means.
Whelton, Michael. (1998). Two Paths: Papal Monarchy - Collegial Tradition -- Rome's Claims of Papal Supremacy in the Light of Orthodox Christian Teaching. Salisbury, MA: Regina Orthodox Press.
Auer, Rev. Fr. Marc. (1990). THE MYTH OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY: A History of the False Roman Catholic Doctrine of Papal Infallibility and Universal Jurisdiction Over Christians. Buffalo, NY: The Cenacle/ Liberty, TN: St. John of Kronstadt Press.
Protopresbyter George Dion. Dragas. (2004). Ecclesiasticus I: Introducing Eastern Orthodoxy. Rollinsford, NH: Orthodox Research Institute.
Protopresbyter George Dion. Dragas. (2005). Ecclesiasticus II: Orthodox Icons, Saints, Feasts and Prayer. Rollinsford, NH: Orthodox Research Institute.
Fr. Peter E. Gillquist. (1992). Becoming Orthodox: A Journey to the Ancient Christian Faith. Ben Lomond, CA: Conciliar Press.
I studied the Bible and learned Lutheranism. Then I learned Presbyterianism, Catholicism, and other faiths. I studied everything from Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses to Methodism, Anglicanism, and Baptist beliefs, and Pentecostalism/charismatic renewal.
I learned about dispensationalism versus covenant theology. I also learned about Eastern Orthodoxy and the Ethiopian Church. I came to the conclusion that the EOC is teaching/preaching the true Gospel of Christ.
Scott

 

[Strangelove]

Do you think Saint Paul is dead? Then why are you reading most of the New Testament. It was written by a dead man. Why would you want to listen to the words of a dead man? Isn't that getting into contact with the dead?
I don't try to get messages from Saint Paul or Saint Basil. I rely on their writings. We pray to God through the saints, and so, I ask you this: How do you know God hears you? If God hears us, and the saints are alive in heaven, can't God's saints be told by God what we pray?
Do you think God is keeping a secret from His Church in heaven?
Have you read Revelation? Don't you hear what Revelation says? The saints praying before the throne of God? Don't you think they are praying for the Church on earth? Why wouldn't they do that?

reading the bible is not communicating with dead guys Scotty.

are you really asking me how I know God hears me Scott?

We are told to pray to God.

Again...why are you praying to people who could be dead?

You are risking necromancy...why would you wanna do that?

 

[Strangelove]

Friend,
John 15:26 shows that EO is teaching the true Gospel about the Holy Trinity. Much of Christendom falsifies or ignores this key text.
You would not call EO if you read John 15:26 and the history of the Filioque controversy. It is one of the key things that shows EO understands and believes the Bible.

~SNIPPED PROPAGANDA SPAMMING~

I studied the Bible and learned Lutheranism. Then I learned Presbyterianism, Catholicism, and other faiths. I studied everything from Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses to Methodism, Anglicanism, and Baptist beliefs, and Pentecostalism/charismatic renewal.
I learned about dispensationalism versus covenant theology. I also learned about Eastern Orthodoxy and the Ethiopian Church. I came to the conclusion that the EOC is teaching/preaching the true Gospel of Christ.
Scott

a) attacking certain denominations does not excuse the EOC from practicing idolatry and necromancy and attempting to continue the pharisaic temple cult.

b) It seems you overstudied.