The Immaculate Conception

[ConstantineTG]

I agree with that, Original Sin was first posited by St Paul and later developed by theologians over the centuries (like St Augustine)

Neither the Jews nor the Muslims have any concept of Original Sin despite both having the same creation story.

We never really knew about Original Sin until Christ told us about it. Although I agree that the context of Original Sin is a development in theology and philosophy, its source is from the teaching of Christ and the very core of our belief. If one does not believe in the Fall of Man, the one can never be Christian. Because what is the purpose of Christ becoming man if there is no fallen nature to redeem?

 

[razredge]

We never really knew about Original Sin until Christ told us about it. Although I agree that the context of Original Sin is a development in theology and philosophy, its source is from the teaching of Christ and the very core of our belief. If one does not believe in the Fall of Man, the one can never be Christian. Because what is the purpose of Christ becoming man if there is no fallen nature to redeem?

Hardly, more accurately “We never really knew about Original Sin til Paul told us about it”. Christ does not mention the doctrine (though I’m sure if you tried you could take Gospel passages out of context and say he did)

 

[jrgiancola]

Constantine, I already commented on your question on August 23, 10:45 pm. See the previous posting. Joe

 

[jrgiancola]

Unity, when I’m in heaven and you’re doing your time in purgatory, I’ll wait patiently for you, and when you get to paradise finally, I’ll show you around. Peace. Joe

 

[ConstantineTG]

Hardly, more accurately “We never really knew about Original Sin til Paul told us about it”. Christ does not mention the doctrine (though I’m sure if you tried you could take Gospel passages out of context and say he did)

If you want to be ultra precise, original sin didn’t really develop until much later. But Christ came to redeem us from sin, and where did sin originate from if not from Adam?

 

[UnityofTrinity]

My friend, even though you said Eastern Orthodoxy is united in fundamental beliefs, you still believe that abortion, masturbation, and many other things are ok which as I have cited from various Orthodox sites proving they are not in Orthodox eyes, how can you explain this? What form of Orthodox you belong to? Are you gonna say these people are not as Orthodox as you are because they hold abortion, contraception, and masturbation (self-abuse) as evil and a mortal sin? One more thing you don’t believe in Purgatory, but as evident through almost 1000 years of Orthodox history has proven that Orthodox do pray to the dead, and many articles I’ve cited prove Orthodox believe in some place between heaven and earth (or a state of being, depends on different interpretation), again are you gonna deny these people Orthodoxy? Let me ask you this, if an Orthodox does not believe in Purgatory, or whatever name he calls it, then what is the meaning for the Orthodox prayers to the dead? Asking God for his peace?

 

[perro_sarnoso]

I think I understand the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

Is it important to Catholics? . .

Ya darn skippy.

 

[razredge]

But Christ came to redeem us from sin, and where did sin originate from if not from Adam?

There are other options - Christ might have come to redeem us from the collective sin of humanity past, present & future - the lack of Original Sin would make no difference to this.

 

[ConstantineTG]

There are other options - Christ might have come to redeem us from the collective sin of humanity past, present & future - the lack of Original Sin would make no difference to this.

Sin came into the world through Adam. Besides, you’re now speculating. Its your current opinion vs. what has been taught in the Church for 2000 years.

 

[razredge]

Sin came into the world through Adam. Besides, you’re now speculating. Its your current opinion vs. what has been taught in the Church for 2000 years.

Now that i’ve refuted your previous statement, you’re simply falling back on your original claim that ‘…where did sin originate from if not from Adam?’

And I might be speculating, but so was St Paul back in the day and my speculation fits in better with the evidence (to be fair St Paul didn’t know about evolution and that Adam & Eve didn’t exist).

 

[ConstantineTG]

Now that i’ve refuted your previous statement, you’re simply falling back on your original claim that ‘…where did sin originate from if not from Adam?’

And I might be speculating, but so was St Paul back in the day and my speculation fits in better with the evidence (to be fair St Paul didn’t know about evolution and that Adam & Eve didn’t exist).

You haven’t refuted anything. You just admitted to speculating on things. St. Paul wasn’t speculating, his teachings has been accepted from the beginning by the Apostles and the Church Fathers. History weighs heavily against your false claims.

 

[razredge]

You haven’t refuted anything. You just admitted to speculating on things. St. Paul wasn’t speculating, his teachings has been accepted from the beginning by the Apostles and the Church Fathers. History weighs heavily against your false claims.

Ahem, you are being disingenuous - you said:

But Christ came to redeem us from sin, and where did sin originate from if not from Adam?

To which I responded to with the following -

There are other options - Christ might have come to redeem us from the collective sin of humanity past, present & future - the lack of Original Sin would make no difference to this.

You then simply restated your first statement and since that objection failed have changed your tact to saying I am ‘merely speculating’.

I might be, but you are merely asserting that St Paul wasn’t speculating - tell me, how do you know that he wasn’t?
Especially since history and science, thoroughly demolish the basis of his claims which are rooted in a literal interpretation of Genesis and a historical Adam & Eve.

 

[jrgiancola]

Uni, I already responded in a previous posting why we pray for the dead. It’s not because we believe in purgatory. More than half of Catholics practice artificial contraception. 31% of abortions are got by catholic women. Does that mean the fundamental teachings of the RCC are not universally accepted? Some Orthodox may have beliefs that are closer to RCC beliefs regarding moral issues. But if you read the Greek Orthodox website that I cited, you will find what this church believes fundamentally. It does not hold the dogma of the Immaculate Conception; it does not hold the doctrine of purgatory; it allows abortion to save the life of the mother; it permits artificial contraception and artificial insemination; it does not believe in the infallibility of the bishop of Rome; it does not accept that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son; it does not believe masturbation is a sin but is rather an inappropriate way to use the body sexually; it does believe homosexual behavior is a sin, but that alone does not guarantee a trip to hell. Have you read what is posted on the website? goarch.org ? Just because some Orthodox hold sterner views does not make them the official doctrines of the church. I’ll wait for you in heaven while you do your time in purgatory. And then we’ll laugh about all of this.

 

[jrgiancola]

Some quotes from the website:

Only in the case in which the life of the mother is endangered by the conceptus is it morally appropriate to consider the possibility of abortion. Yet, even here, the main operative value is the preservation of life. Numerous prudential considerations will be taken into account, though it is likely that the preservation of the mother’s life will most often be chosen. In any case, it falls into the class of “involuntary sin” in which the evil of the event is recognized, while the personal guilt is mitigated (Papacostas, pp. 9-13, 83-105).

The purposes of marriage and their ranking in importance are a point of difference among Orthodox authorities (both patristic and contemporary), but scriptural and patristic evidence argue for at least four purposes for marriage, without ranking them in order of primacy:

1. the birth and care, of children,
2. the mutual aid of the couple,
3. the satisfaction of the sexual drive,
4. growth in mutuality and oneness, i.e., love.

In the mixture of these purposes, the whole purpose of human sexuality is fulfilled and completed, ethically and humanly (Constantelos, 1975).

Autoerotic activity is adjudged as an improper expression of human sexuality, and as such is labeled masturbation.

Photius restated the correct teaching of the Nicene Creed, opposing the filioque phrase; correctly asserted the canonical jurisdictional order of administration of the Church; reaffirmed the correct teaching against the primacy of the pope, his infallibility, the riches of Christ and the saints, indulgences, purgatory, the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and her bodily assumption. All of these innovations of the West were among the factors which ultimately led to the Great Schism in 1054, setting the stage for the Protestant movement in 1517 as well. Photius’ great encyclical restated and reaffirmed the orthodox teaching of the Undivided Church, and stands as a major source of Orthodox teaching.

Because the Church has not written and officially adopted a catechism in which the infallible teaching of the Church is definitely expressed, the theologian has the “freedom with authority”, to express anew the same unchangeable Truths of Christ. Christianity (or Christendom) has been separated into many parts because individuals through the centuries have taken it upon themselves to interpret the Bible personally. They have used limited knowledge and were unaware of the basic sources, and have consequently arrived at false interpretations, each claiming to be led by the Holy Spirit. Thus, the Holy Spirit is made to seem a dividing force for each, rather than leading and being the guardian of the One Undivided Church of Christ as revealed in Scripture. Apostle Peter warns against personal interpretation of Scripture by saying that:

“Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this ashe does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard tounderstand, which the unlearned and unstable twist to their owndestruction, as they do the other scriptures … knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of man and lose your own stability.” (2 Peter 3:15-17)

 

[Huiou_Theou]

My friend, even though you said Eastern Orthodoxy is united in fundamental beliefs,

Much of what he says is inconsistent, yes.

you still believe that abortion, masturbation, and many other things are ok which as I have cited from various Orthodox sites proving they are not in Orthodox eyes, how can you explain this? What form of Orthodox you belong to?

The most protestant version… In this case a particular Greek Orthodox church which might not even obey it’s metropolitan. In other words, a protestant’s orthodoxy.



Also, the last time I checked – disobeying levirate law does not carry a penalty of DEATH, but our throw and dodge claimant jr??? seems to believe it does.
Now, masturbation to prevent the coming of the Messiah – THAT deserves death for that is what denying the messiah means. Likewise, refusing to bring forth the body of Jesus Christ, in his Church – is a sin against Jesus himself; not against sexuality. To be sure, there is no more sexual realtionship in heaven – so polygamy is impossible – but only the sharing in the flesh of the messiah is possible in the marriage feast of the Lamb.

Now, there is a ceremony where a woman might even get to spit on a man and his shoe gets removed if he disobeys the levirate law (Moses’ version) to her … and the shoe on the other foot comes from Jacob grabbing Esau’s foot, Good riddance, Esau. But no death dealing was allowed in the story which set the stage for levirate law;

Since when does God not obey the law he agreed to? If it were levirate law that Onan broke, God should have made his shoes rot – not his genitals.

But, then, the Greek orthodox have been schismatics for a long time. The last one I met yelled at me before I made any accusation of him at all – in front of a Catholic class on top of it. He was surely not tightly controlled, Fr. George the loose canon; He didn’t present a single logical argument – but rather resorted to ridicule about computer viruses at the top of his lungs to avoid talking about the er real topic.

They sin by imitation ! WORSE than original sin which is no actual sin at all but a lost friendship with God. The truth will surely come out in the end when we all see the public judgment Jesus makes on the last day. I won’t even have to make bombastic accusations then, just say “punish him.” as did Michael.

 

[jrgiancola]

Let’s just face the truth. I have found the courage and faith to dump the RCC. You guys have not. Believe what you wish. God bless you too. By the way, my quote was from the website I’ve already provided you. www.goarch.org … You can argue with the writers there; I just provide what the website teaches. Joe:thumbsup: