Anglican/Catholic

[gurneyhalleck1]

I think, Mickey, we’ve arrived at two options: the ignore button or just a big smile when one is insulted ignorantly listening to Our Lord’s admonition to turn the other cheek. I’m tired of taking the bait and falling into this tired nonsense and condescention. As some of my students say, “anyways…” we’ll just employ that maneuver LOL

I’ve read your posts for quite some time now and you and I don’t always agree but I know your heart is good, you are an orthodox (small o and big o! ) Christian, and your logic isn’t based on whims or society’s fancies. You’re a good guy and you don’t need to explain your rationale anymore from this point, nor do I.

Scott is correct. Your posts reek of arrogance and elitism.
I am not an expert on the fathers, but I believe my “conservatism” is very much in line with the Fathers. Much more so than say…trying to use them to justify women’s ordination.
I think that it was intended as a snipe.
I try not to throw labels around. I suppose I reacted to your “hardliner” jabs. Frankly, I have grown weary of our conversations. There is much we do not agree on.

 

[Mickey]

the more usual term for my position would be “inclusivist” (one who acknowledges Jesus Christ as the full and final revelation of God, but is disposed to recognize the partial truths of other religions as pointing toward Christ).

Very interesting. Let us look at Islam for an example. You say that the partial truths in Islam point to Christ. Yet Islam denies Christ. How does Islam point to Christ, the Son of God, when it denies such a concept?

 

[Mickey]

It’s arrogant and elitist to say that I don’t think you are orthodox?

But I am Orthodox.

Do you need more examples, from Fathers of whom you approve more thoroughly?

Go for it. I have shown St John and numerous neo-martyrs. St Augustine talking about the neo-platonists is hardly your smoking gun.

You may believe this. But again, if you don’t actually make arguments and bring evidence, your beliefs will probably carry little weight with other people.

I think that other people have clearly seen that my own argument is clear and consitent. I have shown ample evidence and you have proven nothing.

 

[gmcbroom]

Muslims think Jesus was a prophet but they won’t make the leap that he’s the Son of God and Trinitarian because to do so would ascribe partners to God which is forbidden in Islamic Theology. The Islamic faith seems to be built around this concept so it’s an area they can’t bend on in their faith.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[Mickey]

And this is the same nasty diatribe I’ve grown accustomed to reading from your posts, Edwin. Snarky, biting, and cold in tone. Very cold.

Indeed. It seems as he continues to lose ground in an argument, he increases his snark attacks.

I personally don’t make my religious decisions based on secularist interpretations of the fathers.

You can find many of Edwin’s interpretations in our major Universities. Perhaps one of them employs Edwin?

 

[Mickey]

I think, Mickey, we’ve arrived at two options: the ignore button or just a big smile when one is insulted ignorantly listening to Our Lord’s admonition to turn the other cheek. I’m tired of taking the bait and falling into this tired nonsense and condescention. As some of my students say, “anyways…” we’ll just employ that maneuver LOL

I am leaning toward option #1.

I’ve read your posts for quite some time now and you and I don’t always agree but I know your heart is good, you are an orthodox (small o and big o! ) Christian, and your logic isn’t based on whims or society’s fancies. You’re a good guy and you don’t need to explain your rationale anymore from this point, nor do I.

Thank you my brother in Christ. You also have a good heart and I have much respect for your writings…and I 'll bet your guitar playing ain’t bad either.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Right back atcha, Mick. Guitar-wise I try man LOL…I am so bombastic with my interests. I get on a Stevie Ray Vaughan kick, then an Andy Summers Police kick, then a Rush trip, then jazzish Steely Dan then back to SRV LOL! Then I go Jimmy Page and have to redirect!

I respect and enjoy your posts as well. Option one…the nuclear option!

I am leaning toward option #1.
Thank you my brother in Christ. You also have a good heart and I have much respect for your writings…and I 'll bet your guitar playing ain’t bad either.

 

[Contarini]

But I am Orthodox.

Yep.

Go for it. I have shown St John and numerous neo-martyrs.

St. John did not say that Muslims worship a false god.

St Augustine talking about the neo-platonists is hardly your smoking gun.
.

It certainly is, because it shows that the Fathers regarded all monotheists (i.e, people who believed in a single spiritual source of all being) as speaking of the true God.

This is my argument. It remains unrefuted. However nasty a person I may be, do you really want to ignore the possibility that God might be using me to tell you something you need to hear?

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

And this is the same nasty diatribe I’ve grown accustomed to reading from your posts, Edwin. Snarky, biting, and cold in tone.

I am very sorry for expressing myself that way. It’s certainly not what I mean to convey. You are absolutely right that I use the Internet as a way of having intellectual discussions without the restraint that I’d use in real life. I don’t adequately consider that there is a human being on the other side, and I ask your forgiveness.

However, I also ask you in all humility to consider the following:

I do try to avoid personal remarks, and sometimes you and Mickey have both interpreted as personal remarks that were not so intended. I was not calling you shallow–I was saying that the view of orthodoxy found in your posts is shallow. I was not saying that your Christian faith is determined by talk radio or something like that, but that the criteria you use seem to rest on socio-cultural labels like “far left” rather than on theological considerations like the Trinity, the Incarnation, etc. This is an observation about what you say. It’s a true observation and I cannot honestly retract it.

Wouldn’t you agree that these conversations about my personal faults get in the way of discussing the substantive issues? Can’t you see that I really do care about truth? Can’t you just continue with the substantive argument, noting where I am being out of line (indeed, I would appreciate it if you would), but also answering the substance of what I am saying?

And finally, I can’t honestly accept your accusation of elitism or intellectual snobbery as having any validity. If I looked down on people who don’t have Ph.D’s, I wouldn’t be here. I’d be writing for a peer-reviewed journal that only academics read. You are the one who continually brings up the supposed fact that you’re less educated than I am. (I believe you if you say that this is true, but I honestly don’t care.) I have many faults, but I can’t honestly see that this is one of them.

In short, I accept that my sins and failings hinder the adequate discussion of these serious questions., But please don’t side with my sins and failings against both of us. Rebuke me as much as you like, but please don’t let my faulty expression get in the way of a consideration of the truth.

God bless,

Edwin

 

[gmcbroom]

Contarini,
Your right St.John didn’t say they worshiped a false God exactly. He said they follow a false prophet named mohammed who after speaking with an arian monk devised his own heresy. St.John called them mutilators of God (pg 156 The Early Church Fathers vol.37 St.John of Damascus.)
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Ignore button activated…ignore button activated…LOL…I took option 1, Mick. I’m tired of the nonsense.

So, hey, I forgot to ask, how many years have you been playing? I’m getting this Telecaster set up this week. I’m tired of trying to do it myself. Getting the intonation, string height, and everything in line, oh man. I’m just meant to string 'em, clean 'em, and play ‘em baby! Settin’ em up and dealing with the electronics? No thanks LOL

This Telecaster is a mean sucker! They’re like a shark. Primitive, simple, no need to evolve as they’re perfect the way they were built

I am leaning toward option #1.
Thank you my brother in Christ. You also have a good heart and I have much respect for your writings…and I 'll bet your guitar playing ain’t bad either.

 

[Mickey]

St. John did not say that Muslims worship a false god.

He called it: a people-deceiving cult; the forerunner of Antichrist; a spreading of rumours (regarding Scripture); Muhammed as a drafter of ludicrous doctrines.

I would say that is a false god—regardless of your opinion.

It certainly is

It certainly is not. Islam was not an issue at the time…and I certainly do not believe that St Augustine would have recognized their god as the true God—regardless of your opinion.

This is my argument. It remains unrefuted.

It has been refuted repeatedly by many on this forum.

do you really want to ignore the possibility that God might be using me to tell you something you need to hear?

Perhaps it is you that are receiving something you may need to hear?

 

[Mickey]

So, hey, I forgot to ask, how many years have you been playing?

40 years.

I’m getting this Telecaster set up this week. I’m tired of trying to do it myself.

I don’t like that part either.

This Telecaster is a mean sucker! They’re like a shark. Primitive, simple, no need to evolve as they’re perfect the way they were built

Indeed. :yup:

 

[Contarini]

Contarini,
Your right St.John didn’t say they worshiped a false God exactly. He said they follow a false prophet named mohammed who after speaking with an arian monk devised his own heresy. St.John called them mutilators of God (pg 156 The Early Church Fathers vol.37 St.John of Damascus.)
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

And also with you.

The facts you mention (about what St. John said) are agreed on both sides. Mickey insists that this adds up to “they believe in a false god.” Yet he has not provided an argument showing that this is so. He simply asserts that it must be so. I think this is because of his “all-or-nothing principle.”

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

He called it: a people-deceiving cult; the forerunner of Antichrist; a spreading of rumours (regarding Scripture); Muhammed as a drafter of ludicrous doctrines.

I would say that is a false god—regardless of your opinion.

But why would you say that? None of the things you mention lead to the conclusion that they are talking about a false god. You simply assume this to be true.

Please show me the logical steps that take you from the premises (the specific statements St. John makes which you have listed above) to the conclusion (that he thinks they worship a false god).

It certainly is not. Islam was not an issue at the time

Indeed. But can you explain why it is that you think Neo-Platonists had more knowledge of the true God than Muslims? If you can’t do this, then my argument stands.

.and I certainly do not believe that St Augustine would have recognized their god as the true God—regardless of your opinion.

My opinion is not really important. The truth is important. Your unwillingness to provide argument instead of assertion is important in a bad way, because it hinders me from hearing the truth that (as you reasonably suggest) perhaps God wants me to hear from you.

I respect your zeal, but I think you find my position so repugnant that you are simply unwilling to think about the steps of my argument and articulate the steps of yours. Your position seems self-evident to you, so you keep repeating it. I suppose this will sound patronizing, but whatever I say may be taken the wrong way, and I want you to know that I really do admire your desire to make the Holy Trinity the basis of everything, and to preserve the True Faith unadulterated. I have given my reasons for thinking that in this particular case you are mistaken. But I do not want simply to dismiss a position that so clearly comes from a passionate commitment to the faith of Jesus Christ. I honestly want to hear why you interpret St. John as you do. Simply repeating that it’s self-evident isn’t going to help me.

God bless,

Edwin

 

[Mickey]

None of the things you mention lead to the conclusion that they are talking about a false god. You simply assume this to be true.

Many comments from St John leads to that conclusion. You simply assume this to be untrue.

Please show me the logical steps that take you from the premises

A false prophet claims he was visited by an [false] angel. Do you think that the false angel would reveal the true God to the false prophet?

St John says forerunner of Antichrist, people deceiving cult, and ludicrous doctrines. You are saying that a false prophet who St John calls forerunner of Antichrist, who has revealed a deceiving cult comprised of ludicrous doctrines to a nation…has nonetheless revealed the true God to these people.

But can you explain why it is that you think Neo-Platonists had more knowledge of the true God than Muslims?

You will have to find something which addresses St Augustine’s thoughts about the god of Islam. I do not accept your extrapolation.

My opinion is not really important.

Indeed.

The truth is important.

Indeed.

Your unwillingness to provide argument instead of assertion is important in a bad way, because it hinders me from hearing the truth

You will accept what ever you will accept…whether you believe that women should be ordained or Islam worships the true God. There is not much I can say that will change your mind. I have shown patristic and post patristic evidence (from martyrs). You are riding on a pre-Islamic period comment by St Augstine regarding neo-platonists. I believe it is you who are providing assertion “in a bad way” (please do not start the arrogance and lack of charity again).

I respect your zeal, but I think you find my position so repugnant

No. I have listened to your argument and I find it mistaken…not repugnant (I have asked you politely to stop putting words in my mouth).

Your position seems self-evident to you, so you keep repeating it.

Funny. I was going to say the same thing to you.

I have given my reasons for thinking that in this particular case you are mistaken.

And I have given mine for thinking the same of you.

I honestly want to hear why you interpret St. John as you do. Simply repeating that it’s self-evident isn’t going to help me.

It is what I glean from the reading. I am sorry that you see it differently.

“I have gone to your Mecca and have examined all of your faith, and I have understood that everything about it is false and abominable.”
(St Alexander the dervish +1794)

 

[Contarini]

A false prophet claims he was visited by an [false] angel. Do you think that the false angel would reveal the true God to the false prophet?

No, but as you and others have admitted, Muhammad got most of his ideas from Christianity and Judaism. Thus, your argument is a non sequitur. Muhammad did not get his knowledge of God from whatever being (if any) he encountered while praying on the mountain. (I accept that St. John of Damascus thought that this was a demon, and he may well have been right.) He got his knowledge of God from talking to Jews and Christians, and to some extent also from natural revelation (the pre-Islamic “Allah” sounds a lot like the supreme deity of traditional African religion, whom missionaries generally recognize as the true God known dimly through natural revelation and perhaps through tradition received from Adam). And this is what St. John implies by emphasizing Muhammad’s contact with [heretical] Christians as the source for his ideas.

St John says forerunner of Antichrist, people deceiving cult, and ludicrous doctrines. You are saying that a false prophet who St John calls forerunner of Antichrist, who has revealed a deceiving cult comprised of ludicrous doctrines to a nation…has nonetheless revealed the true God to these people.

Yes. A garbled, heretical understanding of the true God. And of course, God was not altogether unknown among the pre-Islamic Arabs (see Acts 17, Romans 1-2, etc, and the preceding remarks about African religion.)

You will have to find something which addresses St Augustine’s thoughts about the god of Islam. I do not accept your extrapolation.

But why don’t you? What do you find in pagan NeoPlatonism which makes you think that they worshiped the true God, while Muslims don’t?

Edwin

 

[Mickey]

Muhammad got most of his ideas from Christianity and Judaism. Thus, your argument is a non sequitur.

The argument is valid. You are saying that this man stole and perverted some ideas from Christianity and Judaism, mixed it with some personal “revelation”, and added some leftover pagan influences…and this equates to worship of the true God? I think not.

Muhammad did not get his knowledge of God from whatever being (if any) he encountered while praying on the mountain.

Indeed.

(I accept that St. John of Damascus thought that this was a demon, and he may well have been right.)

Yes.

(the pre-Islamic “Allah” sounds a lot like the supreme deity of traditional African religion, whom missionaries generally recognize as the true God known dimly through natural revelation and perhaps through tradition received from Adam).

I thought that the pre-Islamic “Allah” was just one of many “gods”…perhaps the highest (or supreme) in a henotheistic system.

God was not altogether unknown among the pre-Islamic Arabs

Which god?

What do you find in pagan NeoPlatonism which makes you think that they worshiped the true God, while Muslims don’t?

It is a moot point my friend. Neoplatonism was/is a philosophy (opposed by some of the fathers) while Muhammedism is a “religion”.

 

[Bluegoat]

It is a moot point my friend. Neoplatonism was/is a philosophy (opposed by some of the fathers) while Muhammedism is a “religion”.

It was both. (As is Christianity.) The neoplatonists had rituals and a praxis of sorts - they prayed to spirits and tried to influence them with rituals.

 

[Mickey]

It was both. (As is Christianity.) The neoplatonists had rituals and a praxis of sorts - they prayed to spirits and tried to influence them with rituals.

Some philosophical precepts in neoplatonism were used in an attempt to explain certain terms in Christianity. St Augustine, if I remember correctly, was a neoplatonist (and I think a Manichean?). St Ambrose helped him to make the transition to Christianity. It is natural that St Augustine would use neoplatonist ideas in his writings. I seem to remember reading that he wrote against neoplatonism later in his life (but I do not have references). Fathers such as St Jerome and Tertullian opposed it.