Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism).

[Muskokaman]

Well well well quite the little party we have going here eh?

The Vulgate was translated in the late 4th century when Latin was still the common language. The Vulgate remained useful because Latin remained the Lingua Franca in Europe until French overtook it in 18th Century. Like I said earlier no one learned how to read the vernacular languages of Europe. If you learned to read and write in Europe before about the 15th Century you learned how to read and write Latin.

Not only that but various priests and bishops would often translate parts of the Vulgate into the vernacular for homilies and the like.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You see there is the problem THE COMMON man didn't have a clue as to what was being read to him for approximately 1000 years.
He had to rely on common practices and traditions of the day for his salvation. (repeating the same words over and over isn't praying it's showing obesiance)........To whom you ask?..........Good question, answer: the Catholic church and its institutionalized Heiarchy NOT GOD

Actually Latin remained because it was the Lingua Franca. When dignitaries met they spoke Latin, when monarchs sent messages to each other they wrote in Latin. If you go to the Vatican today they will likely communicate in Latin, since no matter where the Priest is from he will know Latin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. Lingua Franca isn't Latin man It literally means language of the Francs or French if you prefer mon amis. Par les vous les Francais?.......non.......thought not...... anyway



Yes I'm aware that they still speak Latin today in the Vatican and that every Pope, Cardinal, Bishop, and Priest for the most part are educated in Latin from an Early age on probably starting in their youth as a choir boy or something of that nature. I think that is great actually. But as for the Bishops and priests translating into the vernacular for homilies and the like. The Catholic church wouldn't stand for any translation of the scriptures into any other language other than Greek (wonder why?) Perhaps for the sole purpose of maintaining their authority over the masses? Not towards the glory of God that's for sure. Is it not written that the Word would be preached to all nations and peoples in the bible? So therefore it had to be translated.
When it was done it was done so all could hear and understand the Word in their native tongue. When this was done it allowed the common man to hear the Word and when it was heard and understood many began to ask questions of the church and their practices which by some were viewed as heresy. Selling of indulgences, purgatory, papal infallibility.
Now I ask you this. How can you buy atonement from sin with gold and silver?
purgatory is nothing more than bribery of a one whos loss of a loved one and mournful state was seen as easy pickin's by the church of the day!

The cathedrals were paid for by the monarchies thats correct but the Monarchy recieved this money through taxation of the common man so in essence the church was a tax collector or at the very least the beneficiary of one. Not to mention that the monarchies needed sanctioning from rome for practically anything they did because the church controlled the masses not the Monarchies. The Monarchies used the church through briberies of giant Cathedrals for sanctioning the wars that they waged on each other and in the end tribute still went to Rome. It wasn't till the 19th century through fiscal mismanagement and the Napoleonic wars that the church itself had to seek a loan from none other than Nathan Rothchild himself in order to maintain their great institution on which I believe they are still paying the debt to this day!

 

[Scotth1960]

Evangelicals and Charismatics Catholicism and Orthodoxism often propound false doctrine in many ways whether it be for social reforms of the day or practicing traditional dogma which is not rooted in sound doctrine or political favouritism of the day. These are FALSE PROPHETS

VERBUM SOLUM

is the WORD ALONE this is the essence of truth itself and it's only found

Muskokaman, The written word of God alone? The Bible alone? Not according to the Bible! 2 Thessalonians 2:15, "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions you were taught, whether by word or our epistle." NKJV New King James Version. Some traditions come "by word" (spoken by the Apostles and fathers of the church), and not by "written words alone". In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington


by........................................................................................................................................
SOLA SCRIPTURA which is the foolproof way of knowing your on the right path.

Muskokaman, If "SOLA SCRIPTURA" is the "foolproof way of knowing you're on the right path", why are there 38,000 competing denominations all professing SOLA SCRIPTURA, and they all disagree with each other on what the Scripture alone means says and teaches? They all disagree on at least one point or another. But Christ prayed for perfect unity among His followers, in life and in doctrine (John 17).
SOLA SCRIPTURA does not automatically lead to doctrinal Christian unity. 38,000 denominations prove this sad fact! In Erie Scott Harrington


The church fathers in the middle ages agreed on the doctrines which were of TRUE ORIGIN... as in ONLY THE BOOKS OF THE APOSTOLIC PERIOD OR BEFORE I.E Revelations is the last book of the holy bible all creeds and edicts made there after do not serve to the purpose of the greater glory to God but as "Wolves among the sheep not sparing the flock" is how the apostle Paul put it. Or as tares among the wheat for another reference so the only answer by any straightway of reason or logic of infallibility if you will is.....................................................................................................................................
SOLUS CHRISTUS which means exactly what it says in CHRIST ALONE........in Christ alone shall we recieve our salvation and he is our ONLY intercessor to God. The scriptures are full of references to this.
This is achieved by..............................................................................................................
SOLAM FIDEM which means exactly that through FAITH ALONE shall you recieve your salvation when you believe in CHRIST ALONE as your only intercessor to GOD for he is the great redeemer

Selah

Dear Muskokaman.
People who profess "Sola Scriptura" do not practice "sola Scriptura". They also profess "sola fide", by faith alone. The only place Scripture mentions "faith alone", is in James 2:24. And, according to James 2:24, justification is "NOT by faith alone".
So, with Sola Scriptura, you believe what Scriptures you want to believe, but you ignore the Scriptures which you do NOT WANT TO BELIEVE, like James 2:24.
In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Muskokaman]

Evangelicals and Charismatics Catholicism and Orthodoxism often propound false doctrine in many ways whether it be for social reforms of the day or practicing traditional dogma which is not rooted in sound doctrine or political favouritism of the day. These are FALSE PROPHETS

VERBUM SOLUM is the WORD ALONE this is the essence of truth itself and it's only found

Muskokaman, The written word of God alone? The Bible alone? Not according to the Bible! 2 Thessalonians 2:15, "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions you were taught, whether by word or our epistle." NKJV New King James Version. Some traditions come "by word" (spoken by the Apostles and fathers of the church), and not by "written words alone". In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington


by........................................................................................................................................
SOLA SCRIPTURA which is the foolproof way of knowing your on the right path.

Muskokaman, If "SOLA SCRIPTURA" is the "foolproof way of knowing you're on the right path", why are there 38,000 competing denominations all professing SOLA SCRIPTURA, and they all disagree with each other on what the Scripture alone means says and teaches? They all disagree on at least one point or another. But Christ prayed for perfect unity among His followers, in life and in doctrine (John 17).
SOLA SCRIPTURA does not automatically lead to doctrinal Christian unity. 38,000 denominations prove this sad fact! In Erie Scott Harrington


The church fathers in the middle ages agreed on the doctrines which were of TRUE ORIGIN... as in ONLY THE BOOKS OF THE APOSTOLIC PERIOD OR BEFORE I.E Revelations is the last book of the holy bible all creeds and edicts made there after do not serve to the purpose of the greater glory to God but as "Wolves among the sheep not sparing the flock" is how the apostle Paul put it. Or as tares among the wheat for another reference so the only answer by any straightway of reason or logic of infallibility if you will is.....................................................................................................................................
SOLUS CHRISTUS which means exactly what it says in CHRIST ALONE........in Christ alone shall we recieve our salvation and he is our ONLY intercessor to God. The scriptures are full of references to this.
This is achieved by..............................................................................................................
SOLAM FIDEM which means exactly that through FAITH ALONE shall you recieve your salvation when you believe in CHRIST ALONE as your only intercessor to GOD for he is the great redeemer

Selah

Dear Muskokaman.
People who profess "Sola Scriptura" do not practice "sola Scriptura". They also profess "sola fide", by faith alone. The only place Scripture mentions "faith alone", is in James 2:24. And, according to James 2:24, justification is "NOT by faith alone".
So, with Sola Scriptura, you believe what Scriptures you want to believe, but you ignore the Scriptures which you do NOT WANT TO BELIEVE, like James 2:24.
In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

Most Protestants do not ignore scripture, just False doctrine and observance of pagan traditions not in the scripture!

 

[Strangelove]

Dear Muskokaman.
People who profess "Sola Scriptura" do not practice "sola Scriptura". They also profess "sola fide", by faith alone. The only place Scripture mentions "faith alone", is in James 2:24. And, according to James 2:24, justification is "NOT by faith alone".
So, with Sola Scriptura, you believe what Scriptures you want to believe, but you ignore the Scriptures which you do NOT WANT TO BELIEVE, like James 2:24.
In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

Salvation is by faith alone. (the kind of faith that naturally produces good fruit).

Still faith alone.

 

[Scotth1960]

Salvation is by faith alone. (the kind of faith that naturally produces good

fruit).

Still faith alone.

Dear Strangelove,
Then James 2:24 is false, and so we could also say the whole NT is false, and the Church that decided that James is in the NT is false. And so the true Church is Martin Luther, for Luther was the one who insisted on making himself as the teacher of all the whole Church by saying "faith alone", by inserting the word "alone" into the Bible!
"Luther took the opportunity afforded him in his self-appointed role of translator of the Bible into German, to add and delete words, from the Bible to bolster his ideological-theological revolutionary agenda. (1) For instance, he decided to strengthen some of his favorite passages, like Romans Chapter 3, and weaken others. He added the word "only" to key Biblical passages in which he revised such sentences as: you are saved only by faith, or you are saved by faith alone. These essential forgeries provided Luther with the "proofs" he needed to bolster his evolving and creatively innovative theology. (2)
"In 1529, Dr. Link, the pre-eminent German language scholar of the day, wrote to Luther asking him why he had been inserting words into the German Bible. Luther's astonishing written answer nicely sums up the heart of the Protestant problem of individualistic subjectivity, "It is so because Dr.Martin Luther says it is so!" [pages 76-77: Frank Schaeffer. (2002). DANCING ALONE: The Quest for Orthodox Faith in the Age of False Religion. Salisbury, MA: Regina Orthodox Press.].
Notes.
1. Please see Georges Florovsky, The Byzantine Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing, 1987), for a detailed study of the Reformation interpretation of St. Paul.
2. Luther went so far as to insert the word "alone" into his translation of Romans 3:28 making it read: "that man is justified without the works of the law, through faith alone". While he defended his insertion ... his critics attacked him for lacerating and falsifying" (Ec. Enchir. 5 C Cath 34: 97-98) not only the biblical text but the biblical doctrine." Jaroslav Pelikan, Reformation of Church and Dogma (Univ. of Chicago Press), p. 252.

God save us in Christ Jesus' mercy (St. Titus 3:5). Amen. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Scotth1960]

Most Protestants do not ignore scripture, just False doctrine and observance of pagan traditions not in the scripture!

Some Protestants make pagan traditions. They make statues of Martin Luther and Philip Melanchthon in the Lutheran cathedral in Helsinki Finland. The Calvinists in Geneva, Switzerland, make pagan images of Calvin, Knox, Beza, etc. in the Reformation Wall in Switzerland. They forbid Orthodox icons, but they make statues.
All Protestants falsify scripture by their traditions of men. If they don't, they are no longer Protestants. The Orthodox Church is the pillar and ground of the truth.

 

[Strangelove]

Dear Strangelove,
Then James 2:24 is false

Why?

He's saying exactly what I'm saying.

Salvation is by FAITH (the type of faith which bears good fruit).

Saving faith.

 

[Scotth1960]

Why?

He's saying exactly what I'm saying.

Salvation is by FAITH (the type of faith which bears good fruit).

Saving faith.

Don't you say justification is by faith alone? James says justification is not by faith alone.
James says exactly what Paul is saying, but not exactly but what Martin Luther says.
Aren't you saying what Martin Luther says? You are right that faith produces good fruit. It comes not from "faith alone" but "faith which worketh through love" (Gal. 5:6).
The type of faith which bears good fruit saves. You are correct on that. Salvation is by FAITH, but "not by faith alone" (James 2:25).

 

[Strangelove]

Don't you say justification is by faith alone? James says justification is not by faith alone.

Dude....the point James was making is that salvation doesnt just happen coz someone PROFESSES FAITH.

You have to check your fruit to make sure the faith is SAVING faith.

Stop getting hung up on a word.

 

[Scotth1960]

Dude....the point James was making is that salvation doesnt just happen coz someone PROFESSES FAITH.

You have to check your fruit to make sure the faith is SAVING faith.

Stop getting hung up on a word.

Protestants get hung up because they venerate Martin Luther, and hold his word as Gospel truth. Therefore, they must obey him as their teacher, and they must add the word "alone" to try to prove their own private point. The word "alone" is not in the Bible. They add the word "alone" to faith, because "Martin Luther said so". Even while insisting on "sola Scriptura", they insist on "faith alone", which is only in the Bible in James 2:24.

 

[Grandpa]

Protestants get hung up because they venerate Martin Luther, and hold his word as Gospel truth. Therefore, they must obey him as their teacher, and they must add the word "alone" to try to prove their own private point. The word "alone" is not in the Bible. They add the word "alone" to faith, because "Martin Luther said so". Even while insisting on "sola Scriptura", they insist on "faith alone", which is only in the Bible in James 2:24.

Pharisees get hung up on Jesus Christ forgiving sinners and resting from works. Pharisees don't like people being free from the Law. Pharisees like it better when their church is THE only church and all others must obey THEIR law because it is THEIR tradition. Pharisees think they are holy and everyone else is wrong. Pharisees think they hold the words of truth and all else are heretics.

What did Jesus have to say to the Pharisees, I don't remember?

 

[Scotth1960]

Pharisees get hung up on Jesus Christ forgiving sinners and resting from works. Pharisees don't like people being free from the Law. Pharisees like it better when their church is THE only church and all others must obey THEIR law because it is THEIR tradition. Pharisees think they are holy and everyone else is wrong. Pharisees think they hold the words of truth and all else are heretics.

What did Jesus have to say to the Pharisees, I don't remember?

I'm sure I am a sinner. I know that I have done wrong. Is the EOC Pharisaic? Isn't that kind of like saying. "I thank God that I am not a Pharisee". But is the truth that no one holds the words of truth, and no one is a heretic?
Proof that EOC is not Talmud Pharisaism.
The EOC says in the Nicene Creed that Jesus Christ is in Heaven.
The Jewish Rabbis say in the Talmud that Jesus Christ is in hell.
Since these two views do not agree, therefore, it is clear the EOC is not Talmud Pharisaism.
Simple logic.
To be free from the Law views the Law as unholy. A Christian that is not free from the Law is a Christ.
Christ said, "Do not think I am come to do away with the Law and the prophets. I am not come to do away, but to fulfill." James talks about the perfect law of freedom. The real Christian believes, "The Law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul."
True, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
Also true: Christ is merciful (Titus 3:5).
We all need Christ's mercy.
God bless you, Grandpa.

 

[Scotth1960]

Well well well quite the little party we have going here eh?

The Vulgate was translated in the late 4th century when Latin was still the common language. The Vulgate remained useful because Latin remained the Lingua Franca in Europe until French overtook it in 18th Century. Like I said earlier no one learned how to read the vernacular languages of Europe. If you learned to read and write in Europe before about the 15th Century you learned how to read and write Latin.

Not only that but various priests and bishops would often translate parts of the Vulgate into the vernacular for homilies and the like.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You see there is the problem THE COMMON man didn't have a clue as to what was being read to him for approximately 1000 years.
He had to rely on common practices and traditions of the day for his salvation. (repeating the same words over and over isn't praying it's showing obesiance)........To whom you ask?..........Good question, answer: the Catholic church and its institutionalized Heiarchy NOT GOD

Actually Latin remained because it was the Lingua Franca. When dignitaries met they spoke Latin, when monarchs sent messages to each other they wrote in Latin. If you go to the Vatican today they will likely communicate in Latin, since no matter where the Priest is from he will know Latin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear friend:
Fr. James Early writes: "I finally had to admit that even though all evangelical Protestants, including me, said that we believed in "Sola Scriptura", almost no one truly practices it. Very few, if any Christians, base their doctrine and practice solely on the Bible, for two main reasons. First, much of the Bible is difficult to understand and requires careful interpretation. Also, the Bible by itself does not tell us everything we need to know in order to carry out the various functions of the Church. When I needed to understand the meaning of a particular Scripture passage that was not obvious, what did I do? I read one or more commentaries that have what the author believed was the most likely interpretation of the passage. But from where did the authors of the commentaries obtain their opinions? The answer was obvious: from one or more earlier commentators. And those scholars, in turn, had learned their interpretations from still earlier commentators. Ans so on and so on. ...
"I accepted the fact that there existed a large number of traditions of Scripture interpretation: the Baptist tradition, the Methodist tradition, the Anglican tradition, and hundreds of others. And often these traditions contradicted each other.. Which one was right? I needed a breaker. And then it hit me that the tradition that was most likely to be correct had to be the earliest one -- the Orthodox Tradition."
(page 78: From Baptist to Byzantium: How a Baptist Missionary Traveled Halfway Around the World To Find the Ancient Orthodox Faith. by Fr. James Early. Salisbury, MA: Regina Orthodox Press, 2009.).
God bless us. Amen. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Strangelove]

I'm sure I am a sinner. I know that I have done wrong. Is the EOC Pharisaic? Isn't that kind of like saying. "I thank God that I am not a Pharisee". But is the truth that no one holds the words of truth, and no one is a heretic?
Proof that EOC is not Talmud Pharisaism.
The EOC says in the Nicene Creed that Jesus Christ is in Heaven.
The Jewish Rabbis say in the Talmud that Jesus Christ is in hell.
Since these two views do not agree, therefore, it is clear the EOC is not Talmud Pharisaism.
Simple logic.
To be free from the Law views the Law as unholy. A Christian that is not free from the Law is a Christ.
Christ said, "Do not think I am come to do away with the Law and the prophets. I am not come to do away, but to fulfill." James talks about the perfect law of freedom. The real Christian believes, "The Law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul."
True, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
Also true: Christ is merciful (Titus 3:5).
We all need Christ's mercy.
God bless you, Grandpa.

Your right, the EOC is not talmudic pharisaism. It's not EXACTLY the same institution, obviously...otherwise it wouldnt be called the EOC...it would be called...uhm...Jewish.

The EOC is the LEAVEN of the pharisees. That institution has taken on certain pharisaical doctrines (as described by Grandpa above) and fallen from simple godly Christianity.

 

[Muskokaman]

Dear Mr. Scott it is only through in depth study of the bible that we learn the true message. I could care less about an institutions function rather than individual spiritual oneness with God. I do not profess to have all the answers but I have found that with much emphasis on study that the truth of the word comes through. I do not defend Martin Luthers biases towards the Jews or any other cultural group as this is contrary to scripture. All men were created equal Amen. The Talmudic expression of Jesus in Hell is as you say in error and the Catholic and Orthodox views of prayer to a saint I find to be in conflict with scripture. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. So this leaves us yet again at the crossroads. I do not disallow your beliefs because I believe that if even in error that you may bring another lost soul into the flock of the great sheperd then this is a good deed indeed and to that end I commend you and those like you. However the inherent problem with accepting the earliest form of scripture as paramount is that it has had the most amount of time to be corrupted. The 5 solas is an almost foolproof method of interpreting the bible and its meanings pertaining to scripture!
By the way I watched a show on Father Lazarus (coptic Orthodox) last night and found him to be very genuine in his beliefs and would agree with much he had to say. It is just the whole mother mary thing that gives me the hebeejeebees. For it would seem self evident to any Protestant anyway that this is praying to a false God and not to the Lord himself through his only intercessor Jesus Christ. In the garden of gethsemane when Jesus prayed he prayed to his Father in heaven not himself or Moses or any angel Just God The Father. This in itself is a prime example of prayer in its most truest and prolific sense of the Word. I am sure that our viewpoints will probably never meet at the crossroads, I pray that they do someday but I think this is not to be. I truly do enjoy our conjectures of viewpoint and do hope that you do not think ill of me for professing mine!

Selah

 

[Scotth1960]

Your right, the EOC is not talmudic pharisaism. It's not EXACTLY the same institution, obviously...otherwise it wouldnt be called the EOC...it would be called...uhm...Jewish.

The EOC is the LEAVEN of the pharisees. That institution has taken on certain pharisaical doctrines (as described by Grandpa above) and fallen from simple godly Christianity.

Dear Strangelove, How do you know that, and can you prove it?
Scott R. Harrington PS It's wrong to make an accusation without any proof. PPS What is simply godly Christianity? Isn't all Christianity godly? If it isn't godly, it isn't Christianity!

 

[Scotth1960]

Dear Mr. Scott it is only through in depth study of the bible that we learn the true message. I could care less about an institutions function rather than individual spiritual oneness with God. I do not profess to have all the answers but I have found that with much emphasis on study that the truth of the word comes through. I do not defend Martin Luthers biases towards the Jews or any other cultural group as this is contrary to scripture. All men were created equal Amen. The Talmudic expression of Jesus in Hell is as you say in error and the Catholic and Orthodox views of prayer to a saint I find to be in conflict with scripture. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. So this leaves us yet again at the crossroads. I do not disallow your beliefs because I believe that if even in error that you may bring another lost soul into the flock of the great sheperd then this is a good deed indeed and to that end I commend you and those like you. However the inherent problem with accepting the earliest form of scripture as paramount is that it has had the most amount of time to be corrupted. The 5 solas is an almost foolproof method of interpreting the bible and its meanings pertaining to scripture!
By the way I watched a show on Father Lazarus (coptic Orthodox) last night and found him to be very genuine in his beliefs and would agree with much he had to say. It is just the whole mother mary thing that gives me the hebeejeebees. For it would seem self evident to any Protestant anyway that this is praying to a false God and not to the Lord himself through his only intercessor Jesus Christ. In the garden of gethsemane when Jesus prayed he prayed to his Father in heaven not himself or Moses or any angel Just God The Father. This in itself is a prime example of prayer in its most truest and prolific sense of the Word. I am sure that our viewpoints will probably never meet at the crossroads, I pray that they do someday but I think this is not to be. I truly do enjoy our conjectures of viewpoint and do hope that you do not think ill of me for professing mine!

Selah

Why do you quote a Latin slogan unless you are Roman Catholic? What does your Latin phrase mean?
Well, anyway, I know some Latin, but I am not papist. De gustibus non disputandum est!

 

[Muskokaman]

Why do you quote a Latin slogan unless you are Roman Catholic? What does your Latin phrase mean?
Well, anyway, I know some Latin, but I am not papist. De gustibus non disputandum est!

Latin is a beautiful language and one does not have to be Roman Catholic to enjoy it. I enjoy many languages English, French, German, Spanish, Latin, Mandarin and even some early sanskrit though I am not completely fluent in all. Russian for example drives me crazy because of the order in which vowels are placed I find it very hard to learn. (need a 2 year sabbatical there to help, best way to learn is to throw yourself in it and get started)

P.S. to which particular phrase do you refer about my latin?

I understand that "the taste of arguing" De gustibus non disputandum est is not considered to be very Christian like but ascribe to learn all that I can pertaining to the Gospels and the Bible in general so my motives may seem to be of an argumentitive nature. If there is any language I need a good teaching of its Greek and its relations of verbs associated with nouns and pronouns in particular to their context in a sentence. Anyways until our next chat.

Donec pellentesque omnes in hoc pariter in glacie!

Selah

 

[Strangelove]

[/size] Dear Strangelove, How do you know that, and can you prove it?
Scott R. HarringtonPS It's wrong to make an accusation without any proof.

Because its the pharisaical temple cult dressed up in Christ. I've proved it in this thread.

PPS What is simply godly Christianity? Isn't all Christianity godly? If it isn't godly, it isn't Christianity!

No argument from me. EOC is not Christianity. It's hypocracy and pharisaical.

 

[Scotth1960]

Latin is a beautiful language and one does not have to be Roman Catholic to enjoy it. I enjoy many languages English, French, German, Spanish, Latin, Mandarin and even some early sanskrit though I am not completely fluent in all. Russian for example drives me crazy because of the order in which vowels are placed I find it very hard to learn. (need a 2 year sabbatical there to help, best way to learn is to throw yourself in it and get started)

P.S. to which particular phrase do you refer about my latin?

Corripiens iridis manet? What does that mean?


I understand that "the taste of arguing" De gustibus non disputandum est is not considered to be very Christian like but ascribe to learn all that I can pertaining to the Gospels and the Bible in general so my motives may seem to be of an argumentitive nature. If there is any language I need a good teaching of its Greek and its relations of verbs associated with nouns and pronouns in particular to their context in a sentence. Anyways until our next chat.

Donec pellentesque omnes in hoc pariter in glacie!

Selah

Dear Muskokaman, I like Russian better than I like Latin. Because it's spoken by the majority of Orthodox Christians.
Zdrastvuitye! Kak vou pozhivaetye? Hello. How are you? In transliterated Russian.
Here's some Latin that means something very meaningful and true (because Christ says it): qui ex Patre procedit (John 15:26).
God bless you. Slava Bogu! Glory to God (In transliterated Russian). In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington