The Orthodox Christ by Fr Maximus Lavriotes

[Metacrock]

say RV, even though I didn't feel that comment was on the spot of what I was talking about, that doesn't mean ti don't agree with it. I like a lot of your insights. are you in the Orthodox chruch? I wish you would share more of your background?

[rvhill]

It is simple, blood is thicker then milk. Most people do not understand this saying, but it is at the heart of the cross.

Sin is missing the mark. 99% of sin is of the flesh and therefore meaningless.
1.1 Corinthians 6:12
All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

2.1 Corinthians 10:23
All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

The only sin that really matters is pride, because pride is of the spirit and not of flesh. What feed pride is the wisdom of the world, things like the law.

Ok what you say may well be true but it has nothing to do with what I was talking about . Nothing to do with the participatory atonement. That says the atoning act of Christ's death is not a human sacrifice and doesn't lead to forgiveness because it pays a debut or screens us form God's wrath, but is a statement of solidarity. In that stametnement God says "I am on your side, I identify with humanity so much I'm going to be a human and die liek you die." if we accept that the solidarity creates the ground for forgiveness because you can't be in solidarity with someone who you re punishing.

My point is that the cross has less to do with atonement, and more to do with adoption. I am not really fond of the ideal with atonement. Really most sins are of the flesh. The wages of sin are death. The flesh dies because of sin. In the end flesh will not matter. So that only leaves the sin of the spirit, which is pride. Most people believe that they can not function with out pride, but pride is a sin. So what can replace pride? Can faith not replace pride, you can function on faith in place of pride?

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

through the cross God give us his faith, because we lacking of faith on our own. If we had any faith at all we could move a mountain. When is the last time you have seen anyone move a mountain?

Let me ask it another way. Why is faith a shield? Because sin can not exist in the presence of the Father.



I am not a member of the Orthodox church or any church. In fact I would say I am fairly anticlerical. Really, I read a lot, and I grow up an a environment that demanded that every ideal must be debated. I been studying history, religion, and philosophy most of my life. My father was raised in the Pentecostal church, he got an uncle who was a big time minster, and Gene Scott was a family friend. I have one uncle who was a disciple Row Masters, and another was a disciple of some guy( forget his name) who a very big wig in the Church of Christ, toastmasters, and a professor at Pepperdine.

[Metacrock]

wow such eclectic background. I was raised in the chruch of Christ so if you think of the guy's name a good chance I've heard of him (Jimmy Alan?),

You knew Gene Scott I find that amazing. A lot of people think of him as merely making excuses for an immoral life style.I have not been called to judge the guy. I didn't know the guy. In many ways I dig some of what he was about.


I don't agree with the anti-academic approach. Not that you exhibit one but I feel that Scott did, although his wife doesn't. She is his wife right? Or his daughter? I really don't know anything about them. I think the academy is very important, but I don't want it to be a priesthood of knowledge.

[rvhill]

wow such eclectic background. I was raised in the chruch of Christ so if you think of the guy's name a good chance I've heard of him (Jimmy Alan?),

You knew Gene Scott I find that amazing. A lot of people think of him as merely making excuses for an immoral life style.I have not been called to judge the guy. I didn't know the guy. In many ways I dig some of what he was about.


I don't agree with the anti-academic approach. Not that you exhibit one but I feel that Scott did, although his wife doesn't. She is his wife right? Or his daughter? I really don't know anything about them. I think the academy is very important, but I don't want it to be a priesthood of knowledge.

I met Scott as a child, and I believe she is his wife. I don't think he was so much anti-academic, as anti secular. He seemed very proud of his Dr in history from Stanford. The guy had his problems, but his knowledge of religious history was first rate. Because of him my father understood the importance of knowing history to understand religion and philosophy, and because my father understood this, I understood it from an early age.

[Metacrock]

wow such eclectic background. I was raised in the chruch of Christ so if you think of the guy's name a good chance I've heard of him (Jimmy Alan?),

You knew Gene Scott I find that amazing. A lot of people think of him as merely making excuses for an immoral life style.I have not been called to judge the guy. I didn't know the guy. In many ways I dig some of what he was about.


I don't agree with the anti-academic approach. Not that you exhibit one but I feel that Scott did, although his wife doesn't. She is his wife right? Or his daughter? I really don't know anything about them. I think the academy is very important, but I don't want it to be a priesthood of knowledge.

I met Scott as a child, and I believe she is his wife. I don't think he was so much anti-academic, as anti secular. He seemed very proud of his Dr in history from Stanford. The guy had his problems, but his knowledge of religious history was first rate. Because of him my father understood the importance of knowing history to understand religion and philosophy, and because my father understood this, I understood it from an early age.

that's neat. The message I saw him giving much of the time was not being legalistic. I wouldn't' think he worried about y secularization but more about being uptight and legalistic. But then I have only been an occasional or causal watcher of his show.