coptichymns.net - Sharing the Joy of Coptic Hymns Around the World

Truth.Seeker

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 12:40 PM

Going back to the original topic about which Churches are "true:" (This is a much funner topic than the miracles thing because like people have said previously, Christ Himself said that even people who cast out demons may not enter heaven. So, I don't think it's even an issue.)

If Church A says "not X" and Church B says "X," then one of them must be wrong. Note that "X" and "Not X" cover all the possibilities that could exist. In other words, the table either has four legs or doesn't have four legs. There is a cup of water on the table or there isn't a cup of water on the table, etc...

Now, if Church A says "X" and Church B says "Y," then AT LEAST one of them is wrong (if X and Y contradict each other). Note that "X" and "Y" do NOT cover all the possibilities that could exist. In other words, X could be "the table in the other room has three legs," Y could be "the table in the other room has four legs," for all we know, Z is the correct answer because the table in the other room really has five legs.

Now, since we know the Holy Spirit leads the Church, and the Holy Spirit can't make a mistake, then ONLY one church can have it all right because the churches disagree (Note that ONE, no more, no less, can be right. No less because Christ promised the leadership of the Holy Spirit, and no more because of disagreements. By "Church" I mean an entity in communion, i.e. the Oriental Orthodox Church, not the Coptic Church). This is not me judging other churches, this is me glorifying the Holy Spirit to His rightful place. To say that two churches which disagree can both be right is to say the Holy Spirit is confused.

Now, since we are Copts and believe our Church is right, then it must be lead by the Holy Spirit. For any other church that disagrees with us to be right: 1) The Holy Spirit is wrong, OR 2) The Holy Spirit is leading both churches and contradicting Himself. Both cases are absolutely 1) blasphemous, 2) not possible.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 411

Overgrownegyptian

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 01:05 PM

My brother George,

Sorry it took soo long to reply back, I was back at home visiting and was at Clearwater Church because His Grace Bishop Youssef was visiting I can never pass up a visit by His Grace so forgive me.

From geomekhaiel:
I feel as though a lot of what you just said puts us as judges over other religions. Yes, some religions, like baptists, do not have the sacraments, but it is not our place to make an assumption towards them not entering into the kingdom of heaven...that even seems a bit mean.

It really isn't our place to judge who will enter heaven and who will not. We just need to be focused on the truth, Jesus Christ.

By no means was I trying to assume they weren't going to heaven, I would never do such a thing. I have friends that are of other denominations and I would LOVE for them to go to heaven..heaven is limitless so there's enough room there for everyone in the whole world I was rather trying to say that there are Apostlic teachings..for instance, baptism. Jesus Christ Himself was baptized and did it to show us as an example what we should do and it says in the Bible that we need to be reborn with the water and spirit. Now a person that wasn't baptized..will that person get into heaven even though they are Christian? My answer: I can't answer it. I know what is my responsibility. I am responsible to be baptized to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Will God allow this person, though they are Christian and love Him, who isn't baptized enter into the Kingdom of Heaven? Not my place, I do know His mercies are infinite. I would rather though not risk entrance into Paradise and take advantage of His mercies and say, "I love Him and to gain entrance I just need to say I'm saved and that way I'll enter into Heaven and that's it." I know what's required of me to do and I won't risk in any way whatsoever my salvation. Do you see the point I was trying to make? I wasn't trying to judge but rather I was saying we were taught things by Jesus Christ Himself (when he passed His teachings to disciples,apostles,who passed them to patriachs, etc etc) for ex: baptism, and we MUST be baptized. God is the Judge and He, only He, will judge in the end. Never will you hear me make a judgment call.

From geomekhaiel:
The point that I am hinting towards is that baptism is not a thing in which we can easily say if one is not baptised they will not enter the kingdom of heaven

The thing is this. Baptism is a MUST. Why do I say that, especially right after I said I wouldn't judge? I'm not judging but I'm rather making a point. In Baptism, the Holy Spirit descends and fills the person being baptized. Without Baptism, there is no dwelling of the Holy Spirit within the person. The Holy Spirit is the conscience of God, it is the thing that rebukes us when we make mistakes in life and when we sin. The Holy Spirit is what guides us to do good even though we live in a corrupted body. Now don't take what I just said as anything more because I am not saying that those without Baptism, don't have the Holy Spirit, and therefore will not enter into heaven. I'm not saying that. I'm saying this: there are 3 periods. We are in the 3rd period. The first period was the Old Testament which was God the Father speaking with His children (Moses, Israel, Elijah, etc). The second period was the New Testament with God the Word (Jesus Christ) when He lived amongst us. The third period is the one we live in now, which is the period of the Holy Spirit. All the fathers of the Church have even made this point, so it's not something of my own knowledge. How can we then DWELL with God when the Holy Spirit hasn't descended on us via Baptism? Yes, we can dwell with God (pray, read the Bible, congregational activities, and I say all those with the sense of Church in general..not just the Coptic Church but all Churches) but we can't DWELL with God unless we are Baptized.

The difference between dwell and DWELL is this: dwell is to be a Church going Christian, to pray, to read the Bible..things that ALL Christians are supposed to do and Christians of other denominations do. To DWELL with God is to be Baptized with the Holy Spirit because that's the only way God will DWELL within us, because we can't be in Him..He must be within us. The only way for Him to be within us (DWELL within us) is for the Holy Spirit to be inside of us, to make a proper place for the throne of God within us.

I hope this makes sense, God bless you.

_________________
andrew

May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be pleasing to you, pleasing to you.

"O God, my God, I will rise up early unto You; for my soul has thirsted for You: to make my flesh blossom for You, in a barren land and a trackless and dry place." (Psalm 62:1)

"My son, give me your heart, And let your eyes observe my ways." (Proverbs 23:26)

"Every meeting with Christ is a prayer of renewal. Every prayer is an experience of faith. Every experience of faith is eternal life." Abouna Matta El-Meskeen

Administrator of copticamerica.org. Ask me for help!

Joined: Sep 23, 2003 | Posts: 245
Location: St. Mary and St. George COC [tallahassee, fl] l St. George COC [tampa, fl]

AMoussa01

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 03:11 PM

Truth.Seeker,

I STRONGLY disagree with you here. Unfortunately, i do not have a time to write a lengthy reply as to why, but expect something coming eventually...

GB
tony

_________________
Tony Moza,
HCOC Distant Member


+ To Protect and Preserve +

HCOC: Sing it! Live it! Love it!

Joined: Jan 08, 2007 | Posts: 521
Location: St. George and St. Joseph in San Jose California

Cephas

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 03:35 PM

+ Iryny nem `hmot>

From Truth.Seeker:Going back to the original topic about which Churches are "true:" (This is a much funner topic than the miracles thing because like people have said previously, Christ Himself said that even people who cast out demons may not enter heaven. So, I don't think it's even an issue.)

If Church A says "not X" and Church B says "X," then one of them must be wrong. Note that "X" and "Not X" cover all the possibilities that could exist. In other words, the table either has four legs or doesn't have four legs. There is a cup of water on the table or there isn't a cup of water on the table, etc...

Now, if Church A says "X" and Church B says "Y," then AT LEAST one of them is wrong (if X and Y contradict each other). Note that "X" and "Y" do NOT cover all the possibilities that could exist. In other words, X could be "the table in the other room has three legs," Y could be "the table in the other room has four legs," for all we know, Z is the correct answer because the table in the other room really has five legs.

Now, since we know the Holy Spirit leads the Church, and the Holy Spirit can't make a mistake, then ONLY one church can have it all right because the churches disagree (Note that ONE, no more, no less, can be right. No less because Christ promised the leadership of the Holy Spirit, and no more because of disagreements. By "Church" I mean an entity in communion, i.e. the Oriental Orthodox Church, not the Coptic Church). This is not me judging other churches, this is me glorifying the Holy Spirit to His rightful place. To say that two churches which disagree can both be right is to say the Holy Spirit is confused.

Now, since we are Copts and believe our Church is right, then it must be lead by the Holy Spirit. For any other church that disagrees with us to be right: 1) The Holy Spirit is wrong, OR 2) The Holy Spirit is leading both churches and contradicting Himself. Both cases are absolutely 1) blasphemous, 2) not possible.

One other possibility that you seem to have overlooked is the idea that Church A and Church B may both be wrong. Not wrong in the absolute sense, but wrong in that they may have both lost sight of the Truth. How is this possible? While the Holy Spirit certainly guides the Church, the hierarchy is still comprised of fallible men. As such, it should not be surprising to see that there are divisions that arise as a result of clashing egos or back-stabbings or politics. When one begins to live by the letter and not the Spirit, then we begin to see divisions. The letter kills but the Spirit gives life, as the apostle teaches. Both churches can be right, especially if the core of the Faith is identical, but there is a disagreement as a result of semantics. That being said, the Holy Spirit can (and does) work where ever He wishes, and we are in no position to restrict His work. We know that He works in the Church, but it is not for us to say whether He works outside the Church or not.

_________________
Cevac ¨
<ere peniwt Abba Paule pimenrit `nte P=,=c

"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
-- Philippians 4:13

"Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!"
-- Mark 9:24

"Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart."
-- Jeremiah 29:12-13

Joined: Aug 06, 2004 | Posts: 612
Location: St. Paul the Anchorite Coptic Orthodox Church, London, Ontario

Truth.Seeker

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 04:22 PM

I already said Church A and Church B may both be wrong (paragraph three in the post you quoted from me). That is what I mean by "AT LEAST." This is my 3-legs, 4-legs, 5-legs table example. If A says 3 legs and B says 4 legs, then 1) They both can't be right, b/c 3 and 4 contradict each other, 2) one may be right b/c it may be 3 or 4, 3) both may be wrong, b/c it may be 5.

The Assyrians like Nestorianism, the Chalcedonians like Dyophysitism, but they're both heretical because Miaphysitism is what's right. (Church A says X, Church B says Y, at least one of them is wrong because X and Y contradict each other (Nestorianism and Dyophyisitsm). In reality, they are both wrong because Miaphysitism is what's right. I.e. Parapraph 3.

Christ told the Apostles that after He acsends, He was going to send them the Paraclete, the spirit of Truth, the comforter, and that the Paraclete will teach them ALL THINGS.

Any one hierarch can make a mistake, we've seen it many times. Nestorius was the Archbishop of Constantinople, there was no higher rank than him in the Church (unless we fast forward to 1870, then Catholics would tell you the Roman Pontiff is higher, but that's besides the point, because you and I are both Coptic). However, the Church is higher than any clergy member.

The Church as a body, which in the doctrinal sense means the body of bishops, cannot all agree on something that is wrong. If that is the case, then the Holy Spirit is not guiding that church. Since Christ told us the Holy Spirit will guide the Church, then we know there must be ONE Church that is right.

I'd refer you to Acts 15. The Apostles and elders equated their decision to that of the Holy Spirit, even though Christ hadn't spoken directly on the topic. We know He didn't speak directly on the topic because St. James stood up and said, "I judge," and of course if Christ had spoken, there would be no dispute to begin with, they would've just said, "Christ said so." Then I'd refer you to I and II Timothy where we see that St. Paul passed his authority to Timothy, and told him to pass it on, etc...

So, I agree with you that any hierarch could make a mistake, but I point out that I'm talking about the Church as a whole, not any one man.

Anything a church teaches is either right or wrong. If everything taught by the church is right, then it's guided by the Holy Spirit. If just ONE thing is wrong, then it's not guided by the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit doesn't make mistakes.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 411

Truth.Seeker

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 04:32 PM

From AMoussa01:Truth.Seeker,

I STRONGLY disagree with you here. Unfortunately, i do not have a time to write a lengthy reply as to why, but expect something coming eventually...

GB
tony

Tony,

I hope you are disagreeing with me on something other than non-existence of relative truths .

To make sure you understand what it means (I'm not trying to offend you, but you seem reasonable enough that the only way I can imagine you arguing for relative truths is that if you don't know what it means):

1) Tony says the chair he's sitting on has four legs.
2) Seeker says the chair Tony is sitting on has five legs.
3) John says the chair Tony is sitting on has six legs.

Tony, Seeker, and John are all right. How many legs the chair has is relative to each one of them.

(Absolute truth tells you the chair can't be more than one of the above, if any of the above). I.e. there's only ONE # that represents the legs of the chair.

_________________
A. S.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 411

Cephas

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 04:44 PM

+ Iryny nem `hmot>

My apologies, I misunderstood your third paragraph. If we take your table analogy then, the Spirit would be that all sides believe in a table, and not just that, a table with legs. Would something as trivial as the number of legs matter? Say Church A has a different counting system then Church B, or that the words used to describe the number of legs are different, but the essence of what is being said is the same? This is the crux of the Chalcedonian/Non-Chalcedonian issue as I see it. Both sides mean the exact same thing, but have worded it differently. To say one side is heretical or schismatic boils down to nothing more then ego, simply because the words used aren't identical. To quote Shakespeare, 'A rose by any other name would smell as sweet'. There is a lot of truth to that. When an issue arises as a result of semantics, is that the Holy Spirit, or man nit-picking?

_________________
Cevac ¨
<ere peniwt Abba Paule pimenrit `nte P=,=c

"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
-- Philippians 4:13

"Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!"
-- Mark 9:24

"Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart."
-- Jeremiah 29:12-13

Joined: Aug 06, 2004 | Posts: 612
Location: St. Paul the Anchorite Coptic Orthodox Church, London, Ontario

Truth.Seeker

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 05:06 PM

But we are not talking about a rose by any other name, we are talking about a rose and a daisy .

Before I get to the meat of the issue, let me turn your ego comment around:

It's egotistical to say that for the past 1550 years, theologians of our church and Chalcedonian churches didn't know what they were talking about, and thought there was a dispute when there wasn't, and that you have figured that out. (Side point: ego-arguments always go both ways).

Miaphysitism is not Dyophysitism. All you have to do to see that is look at the reaction of the Chalcedonians to Dyophysitism BEFORE they accepted it. They were strongly opposed to it. It was the secular organizers of the event that had to remind them that they had just deposed Dioscorus (who held to what they were holding to), and had accepted the Tome of Leo (who held what they didn't want to hold to). After that, in one accord they shouted, "Leo is right, anyone in opposition is heretical."

That's very amusing since they were in opposition to it about ten minutes before they made that statement. So, by their own admission, they were heretics ten minutes earlier. ANYWAY, the point is that "language problems" usually exist when two people are talking. But as you can see from what I just wrote, this is ONE group of people who saw a difference.

Today, we DO NOT agree with Chalcedonians on Christology. That fact alone should be enough to quell this idea that it was all just a "language problem."

In other words, today, I know that your "four" means "four" to me and my "three" means "three" to you. So, when you said four 1500 years ago while I was saying three, you actually meant four and I actually meant three.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 411

HonoringGod

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 08:35 PM

Did you know that our church is trying to open dialouge with many of the other Christian churchs to try to bring us back together? It's not limited to the Chatolics and Eastern Orthodox faiths. Christ Himself accepted the gentiles, even though his own chosen people didn't. We can't say we are the right church for God does not choose one person or group over another. Yes they have been mislead, but do they believe in the Holy Trinity? Im not saying that this is the only criteria for being a Christian, I'm just saying we also have faults. A good example is if one person can mislead many people, will God judge his followers the same way He judges that one misleading person?
There are beliefs in the church that don't have any foundation in the bible or the sayings of the church fathers, and yet every egyptian knows them. They were introduced into the church by misinformed people or by old egyptian traditions. A good example is the 40 days after a person dies. This was first used when the pharoah died. It took forty days for the mumification process and burial to take place. It has no foundation in the bible, but it is still used today. According to what i understand from what i've read above, we would be considered non-Christian by other churches because of these beliefs.
When it comes to miracles, many saints will do miracles to those who believe in them with their whole heart. Saint Mary used to do miracles for muslims in egypt. It was stopped by a priest because Christians and muslims would fight over who had the right faith. You can ask any priest about this story. Christ wishes for everyone to be saved. He gives us the same chance He gives to other people in other faiths. For us to say miracles happen to strenghten us is partially true. St. Paul believed in judaism with all his heart. When he saw the light and was blinded by it, did it strenghen his faith in judaism?
What im trying to say is if we consider our church as the only true faith then we are commiting the sin of pride. Are we better then anyone else? No. Do we always agree with the church? No. It is God who will judge us and either give us eternal life, or death. Our task on earth is not to say who is right, it is to spread the word of God so that others can be saved.
How many people have faith as great as a musterd seed? I know im not even close. I know every egyptian has heard the story of a mountain, dont remember the name, being moved in Egypt. There is a church on the mountain today. It was lifted by one man whos faith was as great as a musterd seed. Can we assume everyone else in the city who claimed to be Christian isnt? No. Faith in God (God being the Holy Trinity) and works will save a person. Do we know what another person truely believes in(i mean in their heart and not their churches faith)? Do we know what acts they have done? Not unless they tell us.
I hope this helps.
Your friend in Christ,
Tim

Joined: Nov 17, 2003 | Posts: 42
Location: Southern Cal

Truth.Seeker

posted on Mar 03, 2008 - 11:24 PM

Matthew 15:

12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?”
13 But He answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.”

I think Christ answered your question about 2,000 years ago (about punishment for leaders and their followers).

There's no sin of pride when we say we are right because we're not right due to our own abilities, we are right because of the Holy Spirit. Was Christ "proud" when He said He is the way, the truth, and the life, and no one can go to the Father except through Him? No, He was stating a fact.

We have many differences with other Oriental Orthodox Churches. I.e. the Ethiopian Orthodox have a bigger Old Testament Canon than we do (I find this to be a stronger point for you to make because the Canon seems to be more important than 40 days of whatever). But, both our churches have independently decided that this difference is not important enough to not be in communion. Other differences are big enough to cause excommunication. Those differences are decided by the Church, not you or me. You, in my opinion, would be proud if you think your judgment is higher than that of the Church and say, "Ehh, these differences aren't important."

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 411

HonoringGod

posted on Mar 04, 2008 - 12:38 AM

Are we (Coptic) the one true faith? Can we say this without having an elevated feeling? Maybe sin is not the best word to use, but throughout history if one feels that they are right they start to have an elevated ego(I am not talking about anyone on this post, just stating a fact). The Catholic church was in power for many years and they still have a lot of power in the world. They are willing to talk, but not to change. You have a point with the versus from Mathew. When we correct another then we are doing Gods will. Those who don't listen, God forgive them. Also I never said my statement was above the church and I never said these differences aren't important. I am merely stating my thoughts. I welcome anyone to prove me wrong.

In Gods eyes, is anyone ever turned away? We do accept many protestants as being Christian to a certain extent. Would you consider a missionary from a protestant church as a martyr if he tries to save his people from being killed by terrorists, and gets killed in the process of saving them? Yes they don't believe in everything God asks us to believe in, but God is merciful. I remember a story about a man who hated everyone. One day he threw a piece of bread at a homeless man to get him out of his way. That night the angel of death came and read a long list of wrongful deeds that he had done. When the angel opened the list of good deeds, he only saw one. Giving food to a needy man. He was saved because of the homeless man, and given a chance to make up for his past deeds. If they believe in the Holy Trinity, and have good works God will not leave them.

My point is that being Christian is not just a title, it is a way of life. Americans never heard of orthodoxy until "My Big Fat Greek Orthodox Wedding" came out. Are we to say that everyone who died not knowing about our faith is lost? It is God who knows you and only God who can say you made it or you failed.

Your friend in Christ,
Tim

Joined: Nov 17, 2003 | Posts: 42
Location: Southern Cal

Truth.Seeker

posted on Mar 04, 2008 - 01:10 AM

Oriental Orthodoxy is the one true faith (Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, Syriac Orthodox, Melankara Indian Orthodox). Let me put it differently. Why are you Oriental Orthodox? If your answer is anything except, "Because I think Oriental Orthodoxy is right," then that would be a very peculiar answer.

ANY debate or point of contention will have AT LEAST two sides, and will have each side saying that it's right and the other(s) is wrong. If that is not the case, then there's no point to contest. This has nothing to do with pride and everything to do with logic.

If I say X, and you say Not X. ONE OF US MUST BE WRONG (I'm not yelling with the caps, I'm just emphasizing ). I definitely don't think I'm wrong because otherwise I'd say Not X, I wouldn't say X. Vice versa for you.

Logically, if two people disagree, at least one of them is wrong (go back to my tables thing from earlier today). This applies to the Churches. If Oriental Orthodox say, "Sacraments are necessary," and Calvinists say, "Sacraments are not necessary." One of us is wrong, Sacraments are either necessary or not. They can't be both be right at the same time (this is that relative truths stuff I refuted in my discussion with Tony).

Let me put it this way: Are you, Tim, proud because you are disagreeing with me? Because by disagreeing with me you are telling me you think I am wrong. Is that not "elavating" yourself by your standards? (I would say no, it has nothing to do with elavation).

Like I said previously, I'm not saying who's going to be saved. God is more than free to alter the requirements He set down in the New Testament before Judgment Day. But you saying that Baptism may not be necessary is like someone in the Old Testament saying, "Circumcision may not be necessary." That's not how it works. We follow the rules God sets down, then it's up to Him to change them if He wants, not up to us to speculate that He might change them. So, as far as we are concerned, it's necessary because that's what Christ said.

This is not me trying to exclude people from Heaven, this is me trying to give effect to the words Christ spoke.

Whether someone is "Christian" or not depends on how you define "Christian," and I've never been a fan of playing with definitions because if someone says, "2 + 2 = 3, and when I say 2 I just mean 1.5" then that person is "not wrong." Usually, a "Christian" is defined as someone who believes that Jesus Christ is God. You are getting at something deep - which is, however we define "Christian," you must live a "Christian life" to be saved.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 411