Jump to content

Masihi

Authentic Christian Believer
  • Content Count

    118
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Masihi

  1. We don’t bear personal responsibility for his sins, but we suffer he effects of his mistake and sin, this happens in the real world so why you even arguing against it? If we die in our current state we die of the effects of Adams sin as death is not natural to our original nature, and we suffer due to us dying in it sins in the after life. We don’t bear any responsibility for his personal sins, just like how drug addiction can be inherited, obviously the person who is born this way will suffer without having personal responsibility for it however he receives the consequences of it.
  2. That’s not a correct statement as it’s the effect of your choice that havens you not the person giving you the choice. You can choose broccoli or ice cream, but if you choose ice cream you’ll get cavities and your teeth will rot.
  3. You can choose immortality or death. You have free will.
  4. The consequences of sin is death and a sinful nature which is more sin, we hold the consequences of Adams sin which is more sin and death and depravity. The cross frees us from death and the sinful nature of Adam.
  5. Where are the words obey me or die, we are made in God’s image for he is he source of life, if we reject life we die, we are free to choose God doesn’t force us to do anything.
  6. So because God gives Satan free will to choose good or evil and he chooses evil then it makes God an accomplice to Satan’s evil? The only way not to allow that is to not allow free will which wouldn’t make God just and would make him cruel.
  7. Again you never addressed what I said, do we understand omnipotence on a rational or logical level much less how it can logically exist or function. We as people can’t fully comprehend omnipotence, nor can any created being.
  8. Nice of you to not respond to anything I wrote, it’s not cherry picking because the text are talking about two different situations, so there not conflicting. Numbers 14 is talking about God punishing the nation of Israel for its rebellion against him and their unbelief. Ezekiel 18 talks about personal violations of the law and personal sin and what happens if a person violates the covenant and the commandments of God. I don’t need to get around anything, I only need to quote both passages to you in context.
  9. I just posted this on my previous post: In the Orthodox teaching we are subject to sinful tendencies, sickness, suffering and death as the result of our descendence from Adam. With Adam’s sin our nature was changed. Our goal now is to overcome these fallen tendencies with the help of the Holy Spirit and the way of Christ so we can gain union with God and live in harmony with him in Paradise. http://stgeorgegreenville.org/our-faith/catechism/the-ofall/original-sin God doesn’t hold us personally accountable for Adam and Eve’s personal sin, as no son suffers responsibility for the sins of his fathers personal sins, he only inherits it’s consequences just like in the every day world. Also Saint Athanasius deals with your very objection: (7) Yet, true though this is, it is not the whole matter. As we have already noted, it was unthinkable that God, the Father of Truth, should go back upon His word regarding death in order to ensure our continued existence. He could not falsify Himself; what, then, was God to do? Was He to demand repentance from men for their transgression? You might say that that was worthy of God, and argue further that, as through the Transgression they became subject to corruption, so through repentance they might return to incorruption again. But repentance would not guard the Divine consistency, for, if death did not hold dominion over men, God would still remain untrue. Nor does repentance recall men from what is according to their nature; all that it does is to make them cease from sinning. Had it been a case of a trespass only, and not of a subsequent corruption, repentance would have been well enough; but when once transgression had begun men came under the power of the corruption proper to their nature and were bereft of the grace which belonged to them as creatures in the Image of God. No, repentance could not meet the case. What—or rather Who was it that was needed for such grace and such recall as we required? Who, save the Word of God Himself, Who also in the beginning had made all things out of nothing? His part it was, and His alone, both to bring again the corruptible to incorruption and to maintain for the Father His consistency of character with all. For He alone, being Word of the Father and above all, was in consequence both able to recreate all, and worthy to suffer on behalf of all and to be an ambassador for all with the Father. page 13 of On the Incarnation by Saint Athanasius http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/theology/incarnation_st_athanasius.pdf
  10. There’s slot of unfounded claims on your part, if anything you just confined my point, the universe is so hostile towards life, and it’s pretty much dead set on not allowing life, yet here we are, not only existing, but have excelled to the point where we invented hand held devices capable of communicating with anyone in the world just as we are doing now. Pretty miraculous isn’t it. As to how many planets may hold life, according to most scientists only a tiny fractions of all planets that do exist may be capable of holding life, much less contain intelligent life. God being an immaterial being in nature and metaphysical isn’t bound by any worldly limitations, Jesus being God in Christian belief, naturally can go to multiple places in the universe at the same time at a speed faster then light. Since God is limitless. So he could go any where at any time, at any pace. I will repeat my earlier point to you, Satan has free will and choose what to do just as we can, however if God decided to stop him mid way he could have or he could have created with without any free will. Satan has as much autonomy when it comes to will as we do, he only difference is in class of being, he’s just a more advanced being then we are.
  11. Keep in mind your original argument was that a being who understands omnipotence and how it works would be insane too oppose an omnipotent being. Unfortunately no one really understand how omnipotence functions or works or how it even exits on a logical basis, so Satan would merely be opposing God out of ignorance of his true power or true capabilities, even if he was not ignorant, Satan would know his place and final destiny thus as I said his goal is to take as many of us with him as possible. Satan however knows he can’t defeat God, so defeating us and is his only goal.
  12. I don’t even need to do apologetics on this one, all you need to do is read the passages in context. Nine speak of personal sin in it itself, but speak of personal sin having consequences that effect later generations. A persons children suffer the consequences of his mistake, while not being personally held accountable in of themselves, see Ezekiel 18:20. Also read my previous comment, I said where are we held personally responsible for our fathers sins, not if we suffer from the consequences of their sins.
  13. It’s the same thing I told TheRedNeck professor. We suffer the consequences of of our parents sins not personal responsibility see Ezekiel 18:20. God does not hold us accountable for our parents sins, but we still suffer there consequences.
  14. That’s exactly the same point rephrased and directed at Christianity and that’s not what Christianity teaches: In the Orthodox teaching we are subject to sinful tendencies, sickness, suffering and death as the result of our descendence from Adam. With Adam’s sin our nature was changed. Our goal now is to overcome these fallen tendencies with the help of the Holy Spirit and the way of Christ so we can gain union with God and live in harmony with him in Paradise. http://stgeorgegreenville.org/our-faith/catechism/the-ofall/original-sin God doesn’t hold us personally accountable for Adam and Eve’s personal sin, as no son suffers responsibility for the sins of his fathers personal sins, he only inherits it’s consequences just like in the every day world.
  15. By the way a creator is the best explanation for how fine tuned our universe is. Not to mention our world is so unique among millions of billions of trillions of infinite stars and galaxies which are lifeless and are too toxic to support life. As the conditions to support life are really really what I’d like to call nearly impossible, yet here we are not only existing, but doing quite well. So I would argue the existence of a creator is more logical then your ideas of there being no sort of creator what so ever. If God didn’t want the rebellion to happen, it wouldn’t have happened very simple, it isn’t rocket science.
  16. That’s the dictionary definition of omnipotence, I asked can you understand omnipotence and understand what it is to be omnipotent, do you know what it is like to know every detail of the universe in past, present, and future in every small detail with noting escaping your eternal intellect, or how an uncreated being can bring everything into existence from nothing in seconds, if you or any of us understood it we’d be able to explain how such a thing would be scientifically possible, when on a human level it isn’t. None of us can understand how such a thing works or how such a thing could be logically possible because it’s above human logic, thus nobody and nothing can understand omnipotence fully except the omnipotent itself.
  17. Perhaps the denomination which you belong too belong to acts cult like, still not a characteristic of the historic church which had debated on doctrine, ecumenical councils and etc. Pretty much all experienced Christians I talked to online were happy to answer any questions I had on Christian forums. If Christianity forbids questioning then why do apologetics in the first place?
  18. The words you wrote no where took place, also it’s pretty much showing your immaturity and your lack of a proper response to what I wrote.
  19. Where does it say we’re all personally responsible for our parents sins? Also very nice of you to ignore the rest of the post and only deal with the issue which you thought you could pick at.
  20. If Christianity encouraged no questioning of doctrine, then why make ecumenical councils where doctrine would be debated on freely by heretics and Orthodox and Orthodoxy defined, why have Church Fathers, why even have apologetics if you can’t question faith, apologetics itself requires one too ask questions of his faith. On the contrary cults have no formally defined doctrines like in Christianity or Islam, are very secretive, even restricting information from members, keeps non believers out, exploits its members, and can’t have anything close to a ecumenical Council or talk about doctrinal issues.
  21. Permission in the sense God allows the rebellion to take place, God allows Satan to do what he does so long as it fits into God’s will and plans and not more. A ruler may let a rebellion take place and allow it to continue if it serves a specific purpose.
  22. Only we can’t even grab a basic understanding of omnipotence much less fully understand it, neither can Satan who is fallible in mind and knowledge just as we are, only the omnipotent can fully understand omnipotent, everything non omnipotent is naturally ignorant of how omnipotence truly works.
  23. Who says God holds us all personally responsible? However we do suffer the consequences of what are parents did, the difference between us and Satan is since we in our ignorance sinned he has chosen to redeem us instead of letting us suffer eternally in separation from him as the source of all life, while Satan’s fate is eternal destruction and so would ours be if God willed it, however God in his love did the opposite due to he himself being eternal love. Satan was wiser then any of us, however his pride overcame his wisdom, his only goal is to take as many of us with him as possible as deep down he knows how his fate will truly end.
  24. This tree as deserves the proper response, Satan was intelligent, but still not omniscient or all knowing or all wise. Was he wiser then any of us, yes, was he wise to the point of being infallible, no. Pride can make even he most intelligent people irrational or take irrational ideas. And being irrational doesn’t necessarily indicate insanity. Yes Isaiah is referring to the king of Babylon Nebuchadnezzar as the morning star however he is also figuratively referring to a more sinister persona behind the king, the Bible constantly does this in many places by mentioning characteristics of a thing, person, or place that refers to something other then what the text is addressing at the specific time. Also just some additional information Christians didn’t invent the idea of fallen angels, this idea goes back to second temple Judaism as we see in the book of Enoch which mentions fallen angels. Also if anything the Satan of Job is more like be Christian Satan then the Jewish Satan who is an angel with no free will under God’s command. We see in his pride he challenges God that he would tempt his best servant Job into sin and would force him to reject God, this obviously doesn’t sound like someone with no free will or a servant infact, yes Satan requires God’s permission to preform what ever he wishes to preform, but he serves his own desires and goals. Such as challenging God using Job.
  25. As I said the dream was and is not the source of my faith in Christianity, not to mention that I already considered converting to Christianity before I had any sort of supernatural dream of any kind. Yes, my profile picture is of Yuhanna Al Dimashqi, the man who fought heresy all his life and strove for the Orthodox faith with never ending zeal. I try to emulate him in many ways in how I deal with Islam or other heresies. Not to mention both he and I both grew up under Islamic empires under oppression and like him I try to never give up. Most Eastern Orthodox currently view the Oriental Orthodox as schismatic rather then heretical, although some more conservative branches still think they are heretics although they are no currently in dialogue. Oriental and Eastern Orthodox theology is pretty much identical in everything except on how Christ’s nature is defined. Both Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox affirm Christ has both full humanity and full divinity that neither mix nor separate from each other. The only difference is that the Oriental Orthodox define this in the Miaphysite definition while the Eastern Orthodox along with Roman Catholics and Protestants are Dyophysites. If you come to the Middle East one day we could talk you around all our monasteries and Churches where Christianity first started. Hopefully, I will be able to teach many Christians their faith one day after I learn enough to call myself a teacher as currently I’m just a student, in the end we all are. Bart Ehrman arguments are frequently brought up to me so I’ve become familiar with his arguments and position, although most of the time Bart Ehrman isn’t saying what people seem to think he’s saying, and I’ve realzoed his position is often misunderstood by people who argue against Christianity especially Muslim opponents I’ve faced. I face Islamic arguments daily and I frequently watch their videos since like John of Damascus I have to frequently interact with them. There seems to be a misconception of your concept of natures, Christ doesn’t have a divine and human part in him, the natures are not parts, they are wholes, as a nature can be split or divided. Jesus possesses full humanity and full divinity. The saints don’t posses a divine nature, it merely indwells in them, just as how it will indwell in u that’s how we become divinized or made in the image of God as we receive eternal life through Christ the second Adam, Son of God, and Logos incarnate, the saints don’t actually possess the divine nature. When I pray to Christ l pray to the one divine person called Christ the Logos who took on flesh and humanity, natures are not conscient so they don’t suffer or experience things, persons do, natures just make you what you are either as man, plant, animal or God himself. So it was the one Christ who suffered on the cross and it was the one Christ who died and rose from the grave, it was the one Christ who slept and hungered. But how he did this is another question, when he suffered for our own sake and was put tod earth by crucifixion, he suffered in his humanity not his divinity, since the divinity being a spirit and not physical is immune to suffering and being divine is above such limitations of the flesh, likewise the human soul of Christ being a soul didn’t die, but went to hades or Sheol as all human souls did. Only the body suffered and died. Likewise the humanity of Christ, specifically his body hungered and ate and slept. Like wise when the One Christ rose from the dead it was due to his divinity being united to his humanity which pulled it from death and this is why Christ is immortal and immune to death, everlasting to everlasting and why he is pure and sinless, because of his divinity. I hope clarified any misconceptions or points you had.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.