Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

December 13, 2013

Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services

Written by Dan Eden for ViewZone
I'm often amazed at our lack of knowledge about history. Ordinary people are hungry for this information, yet the organizations responsible to disseminate these facts seem to have an agenda to keep us in the dark. This is especially true when it comes to our ancient human history.
I won't hold you in suspense with this article: The Ark of Noah has been found. It's real. I'll describe the evidence in some detail and end with the historical and religious implications.
How It Was Discovered
In 1959, Turkish army captain Llhan Durupinar discovered an unusual shape while examining aerial photographs of his country. The smooth shape, larger than a football field, stood out from the rough and rocky terrain at an altitude of 6,300 feet near the Turkish border with Iran.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
Capt. Durupinar was familiar with the biblical accounts of the Ark and its association with Mount Ararat in Turkey, but he was reluctant to jump to any conclusions. The region was very remote, yet it was inhabited with small villages. No previous reports of an object this odd had been made before. So he forwarded the photographic negative to a famous aerial photography expert named Dr. Brandenburger, at Ohio State University.
Brandenburger was responsible for discovering the Cuban missile bases during the Kennedy era from reconnaissance photos, and after carefully studying the photo, he concluded: "I have no doubt at all, that this object is a ship. In my entire career, I have never seen an object like this on a stereo photo."

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
In 1960 the picture [above] was published in LIFE magazine under the heading of Noahs Ark? That same year a group of Americans accompanied Capt. Durupinar to the site for a day and a half. They were expecting to find artifacts on the surface or something that would be unquestionably related to a ship of some kind. They did some digging in the area but found nothing conclusive and announced to the anxiously waiting world that it appeared to be a natural formation.
Most of the global media turned away from the find and it became a non-story.
In 1977 Ron Wyatt visited the site. Obtaining official permission, Ron and others conducted more thorough research over a period of several years. They used metal detection surveys, subsurface radar scans, and chemical analysis -- real science -- and their findings were startling. The evidence was undeniable. This was the Ark of Noah.
The Visual Evidence
The first part of the survey was to examine the object and take its measurements. The shape looked like hull of a ship. One end was pointed as you would expect from bow [below: D] and the opposite end was blunt like a stern. The distance from bow to stern was 515 feet, or exactly 300 Egyptian cubits. The average width was 50 cubits. These were the exact measurements mentioned in the Bible.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
On the starboard side (right) near the stern there were four vertical bulges protruding from the mud [B], at regular intervals, that were determined to be the "ribs" of the hull [see below]. Opposite to these, on the port side, a single rib [A] protrudes from the mud. You can see its curved shape very clearly. Surrounding it are more ribs, still largely buried in the mud, but visible upon close examination.
Remember that this object, if it is the Ark, is extremely old. The wood has been petrified. Organic matter has been replaced by minerals from the earth. Only the shapes and traces of the original wood remain. Perhaps this is why the expedition in 1960 was disappointed. They anticipated finding and retrieving chucks of wood, long since eroded.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
From the position of the object in the middle of an obvious mud flow, it is obvious that the object slid down more than a mile from its original location. Geologists believe it was originally over 1000 feet higher in the mountain and encased in a shell of hardened mud. They think that an earthquake in 1948 cracked the mud shell and revealed the structure. This is confirmed by stories from the surrounding villagers who tell of its "sudden appearance" around that time.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
Biblical accounts of the Ark describe it as having as many as six levels. The assumed shape of the Ark seems consistent with the bulge [C] in the middle of the object. In fact, as we will soon learn, radar scans of the structure suggest that this bulge is the collapsed debris of these levels.
Although most people think of the Ark as being rectangular, that only applies to the top decks. The sleek shape of the hull is necessary to enable the huge ship to remain stable in the water and survive tremendous waves.
Ground Penetrating Radar
The human eye needs to see reflected light to recognize an object. To visualize what remains below the earth, scientists use microwaves which can penetrate the ground and bounce back when they hit something solid. This technique is commonly used to locate oil and other minerals. Called Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), the apparatus us made from an antenna that transmits, then listens to receive the "echo" and prints the result on a piece of paper. The delay and strength of this echo tell the geologists how solid and at what depth the objects are under the earth.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
The team of geologists didn't scan the entire object. Instead, they marked out lines that crossed the object with yellow tape. Then they dragged the antenna (about the size of a lawnmower) over the lines and watched the output on the paper recorder. When they got a strong "hit" -- meaning there was something solid underneath -- they would record the position on the tape [above]. Later, when they made a map of the object, the tape and the location of the "hits" they realized that there was indeed a structure underneath the mud.

"This data does not represent natural geology. These are man made structures. These reflections are appearing too periodic... too periodic to be random in that type of natural pace." - Ron Wyatt of SIR Imaging team

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
The radar cans revealed this structure [above] under the mud. The symmetry and logical placement of these objects shows that this is unmistakably a man made structure, most likely the Ark of Noah.
Artifacts Retrieved From The Ark
Using the GPR, Ron Wyatt discovered an open cavity on the starboard side. He used an improvised drill to make core sample inside this cavity and retrieved several very interesting objects. Below you can see the artifacts which were sent for laboratory analysis. On the left is the bore hole [see below], followed by what turned out to be petrified animal dung, then a petrified antler and lastly a piece of cat hair.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
Perhaps the most significant find from the Ark itself is a piece of petrified wood. When this was first found it appeared to be a large beam. But upon closer examination it is actually three pieces of plank that have been laminated together with some kind of organic glue! This is the same technology used in modern plywood. Lamination makes the total strength of the wood much greater than the combined strength of the pieces. This suggests a knowledge of construction far beyond anything we knew existed in the ancient world.

Tests by Galbraith Labs in Knoxville, Tennessee, showed the sample to contain over 0.7% organic carbon, consistent with fossilized wood. The specimen was once living matter. Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
Examination reveals the glue oozed from the layers. The outside of the wood appears to have been coated with bitumen.
Even more surprising were laboratory analyses which not only revealed that the petrified wood contained carbon (proving it was once wood) but there were iron nails [above right] embedded in the wood!
We like to imagine that humanity evolved in a neat sequence of eras, each named after the technology that was discovered. We have the Stone Age (where man developed arrows and stone tools), the Bronze Age (where metals were combined and heated to make tools and household items) and lastly the Iron Age (where iron and steel objects were made by heating iron ore and adding other material -- like charcoal -- to strengthen it). The Iron Age is usually placed at 1200-1000 BC, yet we have iron nails being used in this extremely old construction
But Wait... There's More!
The most surprising find was discovered with sensitive metal detectors. The team located several strong "hits" that, when dug up, revealed large disc shaped rivets. From simple observation of the metal it was possible to see where the rivet had been hammered after being inserted through a hole [below].

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
If rivets being used in ancient construction doesn't impress you, this surely will.
An analysis of the metal used to make the rivets revealed that they were a combination of iron (8.38%), aluminum (8.35%) and titanium (1.59%). Remember these trace metals have survived petrification and so do not indicate the exact content in the original material. (see Report from Galbraith Labs)
We know the aluminum was incorporated in the metallic mixture because it does not exist in metallic form in nature. This implies an extremely advanced knowledge of metallurgy and engineering. Characteristics of an iron-aluminum alloy have been investigated in The Russian Chemical Bulletin (2005) and reveal that this alloy forms a thin film of aluminum oxide which protects the material from rust and corrosion. The addition of titanium would provide added strength. This seems to have worked. The rivets have survived from antiquity!
The Surrounding Areas
Several miles from the location of the Ark, huge stones were discovered, some standing upright while others lying on the ground. These stones, weighing many tons, have holes carved in them. Scientists have determined that they were anchors and the holes would have been their attachment to a ship with hemp rope.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
Often these stones will have crosses carved in them, from centuries ago when pilgrims made the journey to visit the Ark. Yes, the Ark was well known in the Middle Ages and even before. And its location was recorded in many historical documents.

"And the Ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen." - Genesis 8:4-5

The Gilgamesh Epic (650 BC) gives Mt. Nisir as the landing place of the Ark. The local name for the town where the Ark was found is Nasar.
The annals of Ashurnasurpal II of Assyria (833-859 BC) places it south of the Zab river (correct).
Theophilus of Antioch (115-185 AD) said the Ark could be seen in his day in the Arabian mountains. Later Church Fathers also mention the Ark as late as the mid 7th century.
In the 13th century, Willam, a traveler, stated for the first time that Mt. Masis was the Ark location (present-day Mt. Ararat).
Ptolemy's Geographia (1548) mentions the mountains of Armenia as the place of landing. So does the traveler Nicolas de Nicolay (1558).
Pilgrims to the site would gather bits and pieces of the petrified wood which would be used as charms to ward off evil. When they encountered the anchors, they had no doubt about their association with the Ark. They often carved one big cross to represent Noah and smaller crosses representing his family.

Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
The huge anchors would have been suspended from the keel of the ship. This was a common practice among ancient mariners to stabilize a heavy ship and ensure that the bow is always facing the on-coming waves. A "top heavy" ship, such as the Ark, could easily be capsized by a wave approaching from the side. This is yet further proof that Noah's Ark was a reality and that it has indeed been found in Turkey.
Source / By Dan Eden

Quote by Lao-tzu

When armies are mobilized and issues are joined, The man who is sorry over the fact will win.

-- Lao-tzu

Quote by Sallust

A good man would prefer to be defeated than to defeat injustice by evil means.

Sallust (86 BC - 34 BC), 'Jugurthine War,' 41 B.C.

Quote by Robert R. Reilly

The state does not make marriage possible; marriage makes the state possible.

Robert R. Reilly

Source:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/03/what-ancient-greeks-would-have-thought.html

What happens to the soul after death?

Many western sects believe that the soul is in a state of sleep after Death, and awaiting Judgement Day. Some others believe the soul dies, only to be awakened after Judgement.
This teaching also helps them to reject the saints. They argue that since the departed souls are either “sleeping” or “dead”, we cannot Intercede to them.
St. Pauls admonition in the Bible to intercede to each other, applies only to the “living”(on earth), they say.

1″I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power.”-Mark 9:1



Concept of Soul Sleep contradicts Bible.
Protestants believe that the soul is dormant and inactive till the final Judgement Day.
Ponder over these questions:
*Where did the Good Thief’s soul go after death? (“Today you will be with me in Paradise”–Luke 23:43). Jesus promised him “paradise” right after death.
*Where are the souls of Elijah and Moses kept alive, so that they could talk to Jesus on the Day of Transfiguration? (Mark 9:1-8)
*Where is Enoch now, bible says he was taken upto heaven alive. Is he exempt from Judgement Day?
(“2 Then Enoch walked with God, and he was no longer here, for God took him”.-Genesis 5)
* Where is Elijah now, the bible says he too was taken up to heaven alive like Enoch. Is he exempt from judgement day?
(“….behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven”.–2 Kings 2:11)
*How could Prophet Jeremiah give blessings to the Jewish army, centuries after his earthly death?
["Onias then said of him, "This is God's prophet Jeremiah, who loves his brethren and fervently prays for his people and their holy city."--2 Maccabees 15:14]
They believe that everyone is in “Soul Sleep” till Judgement Day. This is a wrong concept biblically because of the points/questions raised above.
The Orthodox Church teaches that there are two judgments:-
The first, or “Particular” Judgment, is that experienced by each individual at the time of his or her death, at which time God will decide where the soul is to spend the time until the Second Coming of Christ.
This judgment is believed to occur on the Fortieth day after death.
The second, General or “Final” Judgment will occur after the Second Coming.
Particular Judgement.
The first or Particular Judgement decides where and how the soul will reside till the Judgement Day.
The greatest example of Particular Judgement is that of the Good Thief, who was promised paradise right after death by Jesus Christ.
There are examples in Old Testament too, like that of Enoch and Elijah who were taken upto heaven alive.
If even the Good Thief, who accepted Christ on his dying state, was given an active and alive soul, which resides in Paradise, how much more will Jesus Christ honour his own Mother, His Apostles, the Martyrs and the Saints?
They too will be alive in Paradise. Mother Mary, the Apostles, Saints, Martyrs and the pious Christians.
Revelation 4:4-”And round about the throne were four and twenty thrones: and upon the thrones I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold”.
These 24 elders sitting on the thrones in heaven are the 12 patriarchs of Old Testament and the 12 Apostles of the New.
Day 40.
In most cases, the Particular Judgement is supposed to occur on Day 40.
We, Orthodox, consider the first 40 days after the material death of a person as very important.
We pray for them/conduct eucharist on these points during the 40 days:-
The 3rd day(because Jesus ressurected on 3rd day).
The 9th day(because there are 9 classes of angels, and it is the angel that delivers the soul safely to its location and protects it from the devils legions)
The 40th day*.
The 40th day is very symbolic and important in Christian and Jewish theology. Major Changes and Transformations took place after 40 days:-
1)The Great Flood’s rains lasted for 40 days:-(Gen 7:12 KJV) “And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights”.
2)This refers to the embalming of Jacob in egyptian fashion.
Even though the egyptians were pagans, they too understood the importance of day 40 in the transitions during after life:– (Gen 50:3 KJV) “And forty days were fulfilled for him; for so are fulfilled the days of those which are embalmed”.
3)Moses was on the mountain with God for 40 days (TWICE)
(Exo 24:18 KJV) And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.
4)It took the spies 40 days to search out the promised land and bring back fruit
(Num 13:25 KJV) And they returned from searching of the land after forty days.
5)The Israelites spent 40 years in the wilderness, one year for each day they explored the Promised Land.
(Exo 16:35 KJV) And the children of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan.
6)Goliath came for forty days before being killed by David
(1 Sam 17:16 NLT) For forty days, twice a day, morning and evening, the Philistine giant strutted in front of the Israelite army.
7)Noah waited 40 days after it rained before he opened a window in the Ark.
(Gen 8:6 KJV) “And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made”
8) Elijah strengthened by one angelic meal went forty days to Mount Horeb where the Lord passed by and he heard the voice of God
(1 Ki 19:8 KJV) “And he arose, and did eat and drink, and went in the strength of that meat forty days and forty nights unto Horeb the mount of God”.
9)Jonah warned the City of Nineveh they had 40 days until God would overthrow the city. The people repented in those 40 days and God spared the city
(Jonah 3:4 and 10 KJV) “And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown”.
10)JESUS fasted for 40 days in the wilderness
(Mat 4:1-2 KJV) Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. {2} And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungered.
JESUS was seen in the earth 40 days after His crucifixion
(Acts 1:3 NIV) After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.
The ancient egyptians took 40 days to embalm their dead.
The hindus pray for their dead on day 41.
The jews mourned their dead for 40 days.
The early christians pray for their departed ones fervently in the first 40 days and they too understood the importance.
St. Symeon of Thessalonika writes: “The forty days of prayer are done in memory of the Ascension of the Lord, forty days after His Resurrection, [in hopes] that likewise, the deceased, rising from the tomb and ascending to meet the Lord, might taken be taken up in the clouds, and thus ever be with the Lord.” (Novaya Skryzhal’ , Part 4, Chapter 472).
In Christ, we dont die.
The Church (to which St. Mary, St. Peter etc belongs) is the BODY of CHRIST.
There is no separation. So just as Christ is alive, we to live.
Christ and Church are compared to:
# Vine and branches
# – Joh 15:1,5 Foundation and building
# – 1Co 3:10,11; Eph 2:20,21; 1Pe 2:4-6 Body and members
# – 1Co 12:12,27; Eph 5:30 Husband and wife
- Eph 5:25-32
Christ being in us- Eph 3:17; Col 1:27
Our being in Christ- 2Co 12:2; 1Jo 5:20
John 10:34, “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?”
“Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.”– 1 John 4:13
So if you say that the Saints, who achieved a high degree of theosis to be grafted onto his body, are dead, then you are saying that Jesus Christ is dead too.
So we can say that some of the christians(mostly the saints) are in paradise right after death due to particular judgement(as in the case of the Good Thief, Elijah etc)
Some maybe in a state of sleep.
Who gets what is upto God alone. We only have the scripture and tradition to give us answers which science cannot provide.
However we Orthodox Christians believe certain Christlike individuals like St. Mary, the Apostles, Saints etc are ones who passed particular judgement like the Good Thief, and like Enoch and Elijah.
We can say conclusively that it is not for nothing that Jesus Christ said thus:
1″I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power.”-Mark 9:1


thanks to source:

http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/ocrc/2009/06/what-happens-to-the-soul-after-death/

Original and Ancestral Sin: A Brief Comparison

Alison Sailer Bennett / August 16, 2013

The Council of Trent

Of Man’s First Disobedience, and the Fruit
Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal taste
Brought Death into the World, and all our woe,
With loss of Eden, till one greater Man
Restore us, and regain the blissful Seat,
Sing Heav’nly Muse.
John Milton, “Paradise Lost,” Book I

Although Milton wrote it much more eloquently than I could, the song of humanity is creation, fall, and redemption—a beautiful symphony replete with rich polyphony, sudden modulations, and dramatic dissonance. At some point, a tragic melody weaves itself into the score but eventually resolves and the music concludes with a triumphant fanfare. While most Christians agree with this musical shaping, some compose the score with a different prelude. Where exactly did the tragic melody come from, who wrote it into the score, and how does it affect the rest of the sound? The answer to these questions influence the attributes of individual parts as well as the direction of the entire musical narrative.
Here is our working narrative at the bedrock of Christianity: Adam and Eve were created in communion with God, lost communion with God, and the rest of humanity followed them. Two competing anthropologies, however, have arisen from this narrative. While all Christians use the term original sin to refer to the state of humanity after the Fall (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:22), many Eastern Orthodox Christians prefer the term ancestral sin. Thus, for convenience I will use the term original sin to refer exclusively to Roman Catholic, Calvinist, or Lutheran articulations of the consequences of the Fall, teaching that humanity inherited both the effects and the guilt of Adam’s sin. In contrast, I will use the term ancestral sin to denote the Eastern Orthodox teaching that humanity inherited only the consequences of Adam’s sin, and not his guilt. One view is ontological; the other is existential.
The Roman Catholic Church was the first to articulate the doctrine of original sin as a state of inherited guilt (for the sake of brevity, I will implicate Protestant doctrines of the Fall in my discussion of original sin). Inspired first by the reactionary theology of St. Augustine of Hippo and solidified by later councils and theologians, Roman Catholics took a distinctly different theological path from Orthodox Christians. In 1546, the Council of Trent issued the first major dogmatic statement on original sin:

If any one asserts, that the prevarication of Adam injured himself alone, and not his posterity; and that the holiness and justice, received of God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone, and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has only transfused death, and pains of the body, into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul; let him be anathema: whereas he contradicts the apostle who says; “By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned” (Session V).

Almost four centuries later, the Baltimore Catechism continues to define it as sin that “comes down to us from our first parents, and we are brought into the world with its guilt on our soul” (Q. 266). With the publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the doctrine of original sin is still present, albeit improved by new language such as loss of “original holiness,” “human nature wounded by [Adam's] first sin,” “weakened” by ignorance, suffering, and death, and “inclined to sin” (416)—nothing to which an Eastern Orthodox theologian would strongly object. The emphasis shifted from the rigid transference of guilt to a gentler loss of holiness and consequently an evolution in doctrine. Although the Roman Catholic doctrine of original sin seems to have been re-articulated over the last hundred years and many Roman Catholics today no longer seem to believe the teaching that infants are born guilty of sin, it is clear from the history of Roman Catholic theology that original sin included imputation of the guilt of Adam and Eve’s sin upon all of humanity.
There are notable implications for the doctrine of original sin. If original sin is true, then human nature is bad—not only positionally, but fundamentally bad. Not only do we bear the guilt of our first parents upon our souls, we inherited a corrupted ontology and therefore an inability to do anything good. Adam’s guilt changed human nature itself into something dirty, pitting nature against grace. If human nature is inherently depraved, what does this mean for the Incarnation? How could God take on human flesh? Did Christ inherit Adam’s guilt and corrupted nature? Of course not, and therefore bad theology begets bad theology.
Heterodox theology #1: The doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary put forth by Roman Catholicism conveniently sidesteps the problem of God taking on a corrupted human nature by guaranteeing the nature of His mother to be free from the stain of original sin transmitted through the corrupted seed of an earthly father. This is a logical outworking of the doctrine of original sin. While the Orthodox Church believes that Mary was full of grace from her childhood, we do not need to “fix” her humanity prior to the Annunciation to explain our Christology, because the early Church never taught this doctrine of original sin in the first place.
Heterodox theology #2: The doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement stems from the same legal categories created by the doctrine of original sin in western theology. Original sin belongs to a legal paradigm in which the wrath of God against humanity for Adam’s sin must be satisfied so that we can be saved from eternal hellfire. God’s justice and love, however, cannot be separated from each other because our relationship with God is based on freedom, not necessity. While the atonement of Christ is certainly an Orthodox concept, the salvation of humanity cannot happen through a simple act of forgiveness or juridical payment plan. Salvation can only happen through gradual destruction of the devil and our passions by working out our salvation with fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12).
Heterodox theology #3: The doctrine of limbo also sidesteps the problem of original sin for the unbaptized in Roman Catholic theology. A rather nuanced concept, humanity’s “loss of original justice” still results in separation from God and eligibility for punishment according to Roman Catholic theology. Thus, even though they may not technically inherit Adam’s guilt, unbaptized infants who die are relegated to an eternity in limbo, functionally implicating the traditional Roman Catholic understanding of original sin—a doctrine which ultimately dies the death of a thousand qualifications. What differentiates that gulf between heaven and hell for each person, however, is the accumulation of guilt due to a personal, not inherited, loss of justification. At any rate, the more we choose to speculate about the intricacies of salvation and damnation, the more doctrines we must use to support our speculation. God’s grace cannot be measured with scales.
The Orthodox picture of fallen humanity is far less somber than that of Roman Catholicism. Although the Orthodox Church does teach that humanity is damaged by sin, our depravity is not total, consummate, or inherent to human nature—we retain our reason and free will (Imago Dei). The personal consequences for moral deviation are spiritual death and physical death, but the universal consequences for humanity are physical death, disease, and difficult labor. Death is the consequence of breaking communion with God, not a judgment, because created beings cannot continue to exist without God. Since Adam and Eve are linked to humanity, and humanity is linked to creation, all of nature is subjected to the same death and corruption. We inherited a cosmos where sickness and death reign. As Metropolitan Kallistos Ware put it, “Even though we are not guilty of the sins of others, yet we are somehow always involved.”
The Fall of Adam and Eve also created an inclination for humanity to move away from God. While Adam and Eve did not possess a mature holiness, they did possess innocence and potential for holiness, which were lost after the Fall. The theologians of the Church speak of a corruption of human nature which is the result of a loss of the indwelling grace of God—and humans sin because we are willingly yoked to the power of death and its consequences rather than to God’s nurturing grace.
According to St. Maximos the Confessor, the problem is that our natural will has become a gnomic will, meaning that we can now waver between choices. The gnomic mode is what inclines us to sin against nature. Even after heaping guilt upon his own soul, a person’s nature is not mutilated beyond recognition. The corruption of human nature from sin is a sickness or illness. A woman with cancer is ill, but she herself is not fundamentally bad. A boy with paralyzed legs cannot walk, but he himself is no less of a human than anyone with functioning legs. In the same way, sin is not the tainting of a nature but corruption within an individual.
Building upon classic Orthodox theology of God, Patriarch Meletios Pegas (1649-1601) put it this way: although the “energies” of a person’s soul are spoiled by sin, the person’s “essence” is not. Just as the distinction between essence and energies is of vital importance to an Orthodox understanding of God, it can also assist in explaining humanity’s inclination to sin without inheriting the guilt of our first parents. Sin is not who we are, but what we do.
Even though the Orthodox Church rejects the western articulation of original sin, we still need to be born again. After a person sins, the gulf between him and God begins to grow. Every time he heaps guilt upon his soul, he pushes himself further away from union with God and wounds himself in the process. Baptism is the beginning of the lifelong journey of repentance in the Church in which we die to the law of death in order to live according to the law of life; our past, present, and future sins are washed away, we are no longer a slave to the effects of sin, and we are re-instilled with God’s grace and the potential for immortality in Christ. Even though infants themselves are not guilty of original sin, they receive all of these benefits at baptism because they inherited mortality and a weak will. The cross is not an atoning satisfaction or penal substitutionary act, but rather it is Christus Victor—the victorious Christ who trampled sin and death through his voluntary, atoning sacrifice. God took on the flesh of his creatures and allowed us to participate in the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4), thus restoring creation to become what it was meant to be.
The doctrine of original sin as originally articulated by the Roman Catholic Church and later by Protestants is not simply a case of semantics, but an erroneous anthropology resulting from theological reactions and misunderstandings. This doctrine has wide implications for anthropology—sin, grace, free will, baptism, and theosis. How we understand the effects of the Fall directly bears on our soteriology. The Orthodox position on original sin (“ancestral sin”) is that humanity inherited only the consequences of sin from Adam and Eve, rather than their guilt. Baptism restores God’s grace to humans so that we have the ability to overcome sin and death and finish the song of humanity.

Alison Sailer Bennett is a student of music therapy and philosophy at Temple University in Philadelphia. She and her husband, Jamey, attend Saint Michael the Archangel Russian Orthodox Church and operate OrthodoxPhilly.com.


thanks to Source:

http://orthodoxyandheterodoxy.org/2013/08/16/original-and-ancestral-sin-a-brief-comparison/
 

A question of Ontology?

onto-, ὄν, ("being; that which is",)
-λογία, -logia, i.e. "science, study, theory".

Etymology[edit]

The word ontology is a compound word, composed of onto-, from the Greek ὄν, on (gen. ὄντος, ontos), i.e. "being; that which is", which is the present participle of the verb εἰμί, eimi, i.e. "to be, I am", and -λογία, -logia, i.e. "science, study, theory".^[5][6]
While the etymology is Greek, the oldest extant record of the word itself is the New Latin form ontologia, which appeared in 1606, in the work Ogdoas Scholastica by Jacob Lorhard (Lorhardus) and in 1613 in the Lexicon philosophicum by Rudolf Göckel (Goclenius); see classical compounds for this type of word formation.^{[citation needed]}
The first occurrence in English of "ontology" as recorded by the OED (Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, 1989) appears in Nathaniel Bailey's dictionary of 1721, which defines ontology as 'an Account of being in the Abstract' — though, of course, such an entry indicates the term was already in use at the time. It is likely the word was first used in its Latin form by philosophers based on the Latin roots, which themselves are based on the Greek.^{[citation needed]}
The current on-line edition of the OED (Draft Revision September 2008) gives as earliest documented occurrence in English a work by Gideon Harvey (1636/7-1702): Archelogia philosophica nova; or, New principles of Philosophy. Containing Philosophy in general, Metaphysicks or Ontology, Dynamilogy or a Discourse of Power, Religio Philosophi or Natural Theology, Physicks or Natural philosophy, London, Thomson, 1663.^{[citation needed]}

Origins[edit]

Parmenides and monism[edit]

Parmenides was among the first to propose an ontological characterization of the fundamental nature of existence. In his prologue or proem he describes two views of existence; initially that nothing comes from nothing, and therefore existence is eternal. Consequently, our opinions about truth must often be false and deceitful. Most of western philosophy, and science — including the fundamental concepts of falsifiability and the conservation of energy — have emerged from this view. This posits that existence is what can be conceived of by thought, created, or possessed. Hence, there can be neither void nor vacuum; and true reality can neither come into being nor vanish from existence. Rather, the entirety of creation is eternal, uniform, and immutable, though not infinite (he characterized its shape as that of a perfect sphere). Parmenides thus posits that change, as perceived in everyday experience, is illusory. Everything that can be apprehended is but one part of a single entity. This idea somewhat anticipates the modern concept of an ultimate grand unification theory that finally describes all of existence in terms of one inter-related sub-atomic reality which applies to everything.^{[citation needed]}

Ontological pluralism[edit]

Main article: Ontological pluralism

The opposite of eleatic monism is the pluralistic conception of Being. In the 5th century BC, Anaxagoras and Leucippus replaced ^[7] the reality of Being (unique and unchanging) with that of Becoming and therefore by a more fundamental and elementary ontic plurality. This thesis originated in the Hellenic world, stated in two different ways by Anaxagoras and by Leucippus. The first theory dealt with "seeds" (which Aristotle referred to as "homeomeries") of the various substances. The second was the atomistic theory,^[8] which dealt with reality as based on the vacuum, the atoms and their intrinsic movement in it.^{[citation needed]}
The materialist Atomism proposed by Leucippus was indeterminist, but then developed by Democritus in a deterministic way. It was later (4th century BC) that the original atomism was taken again as indeterministic by Epicurus. He confirmed the reality as composed of an infinity of indivisible, unchangeable corpuscles or atoms (atomon, lit. 'uncuttable'), but he gives weight to characterize atoms while for Leucippus they are characterized by a "figure", an "order" and a "position" in the cosmos.^[9] They are, besides, creating the whole with the intrinsic movement in the vacuum, producing the diverse flux of being. Their movement is influenced by the Parenklisis (Lucretius names it Clinamen) and that is determined by the chance. These ideas foreshadowed our understanding of traditional physics until the nature of atoms was discovered in the 20th century.^{[citation needed]}

Plato[edit]

Plato developed this distinction between true reality and illusion, in arguing that what is real are eternal and unchanging Forms or Ideas (a precursor to universals), of which things experienced in sensation are at best merely copies, and real only in so far as they copy ('partake of') such Forms. In general, Plato presumes that all nouns (e.g., 'Beauty') refer to real entities, whether sensible bodies or insensible Forms. Hence, in The Sophist Plato argues that Being is a Form in which all existent things participate and which they have in common (though it is unclear whether 'Being' is intended in the sense of existence, copula, or identity); and argues, against Parmenides, that Forms must exist not only of Being, but also of Negation and of non-Being (or Difference).
In his Categories, Aristotle identifies ten possible kinds of things that can be the subject or the predicate of a proposition. For Aristotle there are four different ontological dimensions:^{[citation needed]}

i) according to the various categories or ways of addressing a being as such

ii) according to its truth or falsity (e.g. fake gold, counterfeit money)

iii) whether it exists in and of itself or simply 'comes along' by accident

iv) according to its potency, movement (energy) or finished presence (Metaphysics Book Theta).

According to Avicenna, and in an interpretation of Greek Aristotelian and Platonist ontological doctrines in medieval metaphysics, being is either necessary, contingent qua possible, or impossible. Necessary being is that which cannot but be, since its non-being entails a contradiction. Contingent qua possible being is neither necessary nor impossible for it to be or not to be. It is ontologically neutral, and is brought from potential existing into actual existence by way of a cause that is external to its essence. Its being is borrowed unlike the necessary existent, which is self-subsisting and is impossible for it not to be. As for the impossible, it necessarily does not exist, and the affirmation of its being is a contradiction.<sup>[10] 



Source:</sup>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology

    

A Profile of Saint Athanasius the Great of Alexandria

By St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Athanasius was born in Alexandria in the year 296 A.D. and from his early childhood had an inclination to the spiritual life.

He was a deacon to Archbishop Alexander and accompanied him to the First Ecumenical Council [Nicaea, 325 A.D.]. It was at this Council that Athanasius became renowned for his learning, devotion to and zeal for Orthodoxy.

He contributed greatly to destroy the heresy of Arius and to strengthen Orthodoxy. He wrote the Symbol of Faith [The Creed] which was adopted at the Council.

Following the death of Alexander, Athanasius was elected Archbishop of Alexandria. In his calling as Archbishop of Alexandria, he remained for forty years, although not for the entire time on the archepiscopal throne of the archbishopric.

With few exceptions, throughout his life he was persecuted by heretics. Of the emperors, he was persecuted mostly by Constantius, Julian and Valens; of the bishops, by Eusebius of Nicomedia and many others; and by the heretic Arius and his followers. Athanasius was forced to hide from his persecutors, even in a well, in a grave, in private homes and in the deserts. Twice he was forced to flee to Rome.

Only before his death, did he live peacefully for a while as the good shepherd among his good flock who truly loved him. Few are the saints who were so mercilessly slandered and so criminally persecuted as St. Athanasius. His great soul patiently endured all for the love of Christ and, in the end, emerged victorious from this entire, terrible and long-lasting struggle.

For counsel, for comfort and for moral support, Athanasius often visited St. Anthony, whom he respected as his spiritual father. For a man who formulated the greatest truth, Athanasius had much to suffer for that truth until in the year 373 A.D., the Lord gave him repose in His kingdom as His faithful servant.

A Reflection From His Theology On the Incarnation

To the question: "Why did the Son of God appear on earth in a human body and not in another form of creation?", the brilliant St. Athanasius replied in this manner: "If they ask why did He not appear in some other better form of creation, for example: as the sun or the moon, or the stars or fire, or the wind but just as a man? Let them know that the Lord did not come to show Himself but to heal and teach sufferers. For, to reveal Himself only to amaze the viewers would mean to come for a show. It was necessary for the Healer and the Teacher, not only to come, but to serve for the benefit of the suffering ones and to reveal Himself as such so that this revelation would be bearable for the sufferers. Not one single creature was in error in the eyes of God, except man alone: neither the sun, nor the moon, nor the sky, nor the stars, nor water, nor wind did betray their ranks but, on the contrary, knowing their Creator and their King - The Word [The Logos], they all remained as they were created; only human beings separated themselves from good and replaced truth with deceit, and the honor belonging to God, as well as the knowledge about Him, they transferred to devils and to men carved out of stone [idols]. What is, therefore, so unbelievable in this, that the Logos [The Word - The Son Of God] appeared as a man to save mankind?" Indeed, even as we ask the unbelievers of our day: In what form would you wish God to appear, if not as a man?

Source: Prologue (January 18)
By Rev. Dr. George Dion Dragas

The entire pastoral ministry of the great Athanasius lasted 46 years, 16 of which were spent in exile. His spiritual fame and radiance made him the spokesman of orthodoxy par excellence. His fearless battles against heresy resulted in the identification of Christianity with Athanasian orthodoxy, which was centered on the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as the Inhominated Son and Word of God. This is exactly what shines through the pages of his inestimable writings and is sealed by his last prayer, which has been preserved in an ancient Coptic text. According to this text, which is based on the personal witness of his Archdeacon, who stood by him at the moment of his departure from the present life, and was uttered shortly before he delivered his sanctified soul to the angels who came down to receive it, recalls the entire course of the divine economy for the salvation of mankind and concludes with a doxology to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Thou art Jesus, the Son of the Father, Yea, Amen.

Thou art He who commandeth the Cherubim and the Seraphim, Yea, Amen.

Thou has existed with the Father in truth always, Yea, Amen.

Thou rulest the Angels, Yea, Amen.

Thou art the power of the heavens, Yea, Amen.

Thou art the crown of the Martyrs, Yea, Amen.

Thou art the deep counsel of the Saints, Yea, Amen.

Thou art He in whom the deep counsel of the Father is hidden, Yea, Amen.

Thou art the mouth of the Prophets, Yea, Amen.

Thou art the tongue of the Angels, Yea, Amen.

Thou art Jesus my life, Yea, Amen.

Thou art Jesus the object of the boast of the world, Yea, Amen.

Athanasius as the defender of orthodoxy was characterized as one who fought against the whole world (contra munum), because he fought through suffering the darkness of the world with the light of Christ. His suffering continued the redemptive work of Christ. The Church honors his memory on May 2 (day of his falling asleep) and on January 18, along with his great successor St. Cyril of Alexandria (day of commemorating their triumph).

 

Source: Saint Athanasius of Alexandria: Original Research and New Perspectives, pp. 92 and 204.

 

thanks to source:

 

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/01/profile-of-st-athanasios-of-alexandria.html

Saint Gregory Palamas as a Model for our Lives

 

 

St. Gregory Palamas (Feast Day - November 14)

By Protopresbyter Fr. George Papavarnavas

Saint Gregory Palamas, Archbishop of Thessaloniki, lived in the fourteenth century, and was born in Constantinople. He came from a noble and pious family. His father Constantine was a member of the imperial senate, a teacher of the grandson of the Emperor as well as of the Emperor himself. He was most pious and had uninterrupted noetic prayer. He associated with holy people, ascetics and monks and connected with them and their children. The whole family confessed to the same spiritual father. He left this temporary life when Gregory was just seven years old. As he was dying, his wife asked him to ask the emperor to place under him the care of their children, but he replied that he would ask the Queen of Heaven to place them under her protection. Indeed, the Panagia protected Saint Gregory throughout his life. Her protection was at such a level, that the Saint, before he would begin studying, would kneel three times before her icon and would say a prayer. When he did this, he could retain what he read. However, if he ever forgot to say his prayer, then he couldn't remember nor recite what he had studied. His mother had a similar life to that of her husband.

Saint Gregory excelled in his education, which made the emperor recommend an important place in the palace. Yet, he had a desire for a higher spiritual life and at the age of eighteen he left for the Holy Mountain. He loved quiet and lived ascetically at the Sacred Monastery of Great Lavra. Constantly he would pray, saying: "Lord Jesus Christ, illumine my darkness. Most-Holy Theotokos, illumine my darkness." He supplicated that his nous be illumined, and in fact he reached illumination and theosis. This is why his theology is empirical, and when given the occasion he delivered it.

At that time the heretic Barlaam taught that the energies of God are created and that man is unable to see God, because the essence of God is incommunicable; that the Divine is comprehended by reason, which is why the philosophers are greater than the prophets. He dishonorably mocked the monks who practiced noetic prayer. Saint Gregory Palamas refuted these heretical teachings and indicated the true path to know God. The existence at that time of a God-seeing Theologian of the spiritual stature of Saint Gregory Palamas was a great blessing, for because of him the faith was not altered. And we know very well, that when the faith is altered, then the correct way of healing people is lost and it puts our salvation at stake.

Highlights of his written teachings are as follows:

First, the energies of God are uncreated, as well as His essence. Created man cannot partake in God's essence, but he can partake in His energies, that is, we can know God and see His uncreated Light.

Second, Orthodox Theology is not cerebral, but empirical, and it cannot be acquired through study alone. Books certainly help, but the true knowledge of God is existential. God reveals Himself as Light to the purified, and "through the Holy Spirit they know God and are able to speak of Him". Philosophers speak reflectively through reason and imagination, which is why it is not possible for them to be higher than the prophets, who see God and speak of Him through the Holy Spirit.

Third, a person reaches theosis, which is the theoria (vision) of God, after having purified their heart of the passions and their mind has been illumined. The way of life through which one reaches purification and illumination is called hesychasm (quietude). The terms quietude and hesychastic life do not simply mean for one to live in a quiet place. One could live in the most quiet place and still not find quiet, because the passions rage inside and mental images drive them crazy. Hesychasm is primarily an internal state and is called by the Holy Fathers the science of logismoi (thoughts with mental images). The hesychastic life is in fact the evangelical life, and with the guidance of a discerning spiritual father all could experience it. "Only through quietude can one acquire the knowledge of God and become an Orthodox theologian. This is the difference between Orthodox theology and scholastic theology" (His Eminence Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, Orthodoxy Monasticism).

In our time, which is very similar to that of Saint Gregory, the winds of anti-hesychasm are blowing, which is why the teaching of the hesychastic way of life is even more timely today. Through quietude a person acquires self-knowledge, which leads them to repentance, humility and the knowledge of God. Contemporary people stubbornly refuse to confront themselves. Quietude terrifies them, which is why when they are found to be alone even for a short time, they turn on the radio or television craving human companionship. Without the presence of uncreated Divine Grace, which creates inner fullness and brings meaning to life, a person feels unbearable loneliness, even if surrounded by thousands of people.

 

 

Source: Ekklesiastiki Paremvasi, "ΑΓΙΟΣ ΓΡΗΓΟΡΙΟΣ Ο ΠΑΛΑΜΑΣ", November 2002. Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

 

 

thanks to Source:

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/11/saint-gregory-palamas-as-model-for-our.html

 

 

 

Assembly of Bishops Statement on Marriage 2013

From Assembly of Bishops Statement on Marriage, Middle East



Marriage Statement


   In the statement on marriage, the Assembly expresses its deep concern over recent actions concerning the status of marriage, in particular the legislation of same-sex unions.
   (The full statement on marriage)
   1. We, the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America, representing millions of Orthodox Christians in the United States of America, Canada and Central America, express our deep concern over recent actions on the part of our respective governments and certain societal trends concerning the status of marriage in our countries, in particular the legalization of same-sex unions.
  2. The Orthodox Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality, firmly grounded in Holy Scripture, two millennia of Church Tradition, and Canon Law, holds that the sacrament of marriage consists in the union of a man and a woman, and that authentic marriage reflects the sacred unity that exists between Christ and His Bride, the Church.
  3. Persons with homosexual orientation are to be cared for with the same mercy and love that is bestowed on all humanity by our Lord Jesus Christ. Moreover, the Church is a spiritual hospital, where we all are called to find the healing of our fallen humanity through Jesus Christ, who assumed human nature in order to restore it. All of us struggle with various passions, and it is only within the Church that we find the means of overcoming these passions with the assistance of God's grace. Acting upon any sexual attraction outside of sacramental marriage, whether the attraction is heterosexual or homosexual, alienates us from God.
  4. We exhort the clergy and the faithful of the Orthodox Church to bear witness to the timeless teachings of Christ by striving towards purity and holiness in their own lives, by instructing their families and communities in the precepts of the Holy Gospel, and by placing their trust in our Lord, who "has overcome the world." (John 16:33).
  5. Finally, we encourage our faithful to approach their parish priest or spiritual father with any questions or concerns about this statement and its practical repercussions in their daily lives.










Source:

Orthodox Observer, October 2013, Vol. 78, No. 1289 Article: Assembly of Bishops Statement on Marriage, Middle East pp. 1 & 5.

Quote by St. Seraphim of Sarov

"Acquire the Spirit of Peace, and a thousand will be saved around you."


--- St. Seraphim of Sarov

Heresy then and now...

Adoptionism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Adoptionism is a form of the heresy of Monarchianism that appeared in varying forms in the second and third centuries and then again in the eighth and twelfth centuries in the West. The Christological view held was that Jesus was born human and became divine later during his baptism and thus was adopted as the son of God. This form of the heresy differs from Modalism, the other form of Monarchianism, in which the “Father” and the “Son” are two aspects of the same subject. The adoptionism heresy revived again in the West during the eighth century by the bishops of Toledo and Urgell. It again appeared during the twelfth century in France as Neo-Adoptionism.

Apollinarianism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Apollinarianism is a fourth-century Christological heresy. Named after Apollinarius of Laodoecia, its main author, Apollinarianism teaches that Jesus Christ had a human body and a human soul but no human rational mind (nous), because the Divine Logos had taken its place. Apollinarianism was condemned at the Second Ecumenical Council together with Macedonianism and other Christological and Trinitarian heresies. Adherents of Nestorianism sometimes accused Orthodox and monophysite theologians of Apollinarianism.

Arianism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Arianism was a 4th century heresy named after Arius (c.250-336), a presbyter in Alexandria, Egypt, who taught that the Son of God was not co-eternal and consubstantial with His Father, but rather a created being with a definite origin in time. In Arius's words, "there was [a time] when he (the Son) was not." This led to the calling of the First Ecumenical Council, which condemned it and its author and established the Orthodox doctrine of the Holy Trinity as taught by Arius's chief opponent, St. Athanasius the Great. Though it managed to hang on among some of the Goths and other Germanic tribes in the West, Arianism had vanished by the seventh century.
Arianism should be clearly distinguished from "Aryanism", which formed the core of Nazi racial ideology during the twentieth century, and which had nothing whatsoever to do with Arius or his teachings.

Bogomilism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Bogomilism (Bulgarian: Богомилство) was a heretical Gnostic dualistic sect, the synthesis of Armenian Paulicianism and the Bulgarian Slavonic Church reform movement, which emerged in Bulgaria between 927 and 970 and spread into Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, Serbia, Bosnia, Italy, and France.

Bogomils, adherents of Bogomilism, were followers of an Orthodox Cleric, likely a priest, from Bulgaria by the name of Bogomil (Gr. Theophylus) active around 950 A.D. Their doctrine most resembles Armenian Paulicianism and earlier Gnostic sects in its insistence upon Dualism. In its Christian form Gnosticism tended to insist upon an "appearance" of flesh for Christ since "true flesh" would be a hindrance to his work of Salvation rather than an aid. The earliest record of Bogomilian theology comes from a work entitled, Against the Newly-Appeared Heresy of the Bogomils written in Staro-Slav by St. Kozma in the 10th century. A 12th century work by the author Euthymius Zigabenus claimed that the Bogomils believed man's soul to have been created by God, but that all matter was invented by Satan, the elder son of God. As a consequence of their belief that the grace of God could not adhere to flesh / matter the Bogomils believed that Christ had only the appearance of a human body. They also reject the Eucharist and other sacraments, as well as relics... on the basis of their ties to physical nature. They also practiced a very austere asceticism, vegetarianism, and celibacy like the Cathari and Albigensians due to their hatred of their own fleshly bodies.

Caesaropapism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Caesaropapism is the idea of combining the power of secular government with, or making it superior to, the spiritual authority of the Christian Church; especially concerning the connection of the Christian Church with government. In its extreme form, it is a political theory in which the head of state, notably the Emperor ("Caesar," by extension an "equal" King), is also the supreme head of the church ("papa," pope or analogous religious leader). In this form, it inverts theocracy in which institutions of the Church are in control of the State.

Docetism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Docetism (or Illusionism) is a Christological heresy, the teaching that Jesus Christ only appeared to be man but was not in actuality. The word is derived from the Greek dokeo, meaning "to seem" or "to appear". According to Docetae (Illusionists), the eternal Son of God did not really become human, have a physical body, or suffer on the cross; he only appeared to do so, i.e., his body was an illusion, as was his crucifixion.
Docetism existed during the New Testament period and even afterwards, being addressed by both the New Testament epistles and by those of St. Ignatius of Antioch.

Donatism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Donatism was a controversy that arose within the Orthodox Church during the early fourth century. The controversy resulted in a schism that later was condemned as a heresy. The controversy was largely an issue with actions of an ascetic, extremist sect in the western Church, confined mostly to the Roman province of Africa. The controversy centered on a single issue arising out of the persecutions of the early fourth century. That was how should those who lapsed during the persecutions be accepted back into the Church, especially lapsed clergy. Doctrine was not involved.

Macedonianism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Macedonianism is an Anti-Trinitarian heresy taught by a group of people known as the Pneumatomachi (Combators of the Holy Spirit) and was so named after Macedonius, who was Patriarch of Constantinople.

Marcionism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Marcionism is the dualist belief system that originated in Rome from the teachings of Marcion of Sinope around the year 144. Marcion affirmed Jesus Christ as the savior sent by God and Paul as his chief apostle, but he rejected the Hebrew Bible and Yahweh. Marcionism anticipated the more consistent dualism of Manichaeism.
As Marcionism arose in the very beginning of the Christian era and from the very start had adopted a strong ecclesiastical organization that paralleled that of the Orthodox Christian Church, the movement was a dangerous foe of Christianity. While Marcionism has been associated with Gnosticism, Marcion looked to a form of Christianity that had no association with Judaism. Marcion’s vision seemed centered around the texts that were being used by Christians for a new testament, an approach that led the Orthodox on a path of defining the New Testament.
Early on, Marcionism was denounced by its opponents as heresy. These opponents also wrote against it, notably by Tertullian in a five-book treatise titled Adversus Marcionem that was written about 208. The criticisms against Marcionism, thus, predate the authority, claimed by the First Council of Nicea in 325, to declare what is heretical against the Church. Marcion's writings are lost, though they were widely read and numerous manuscripts must have existed. Even so, many scholars (including Henry Wace) claim it is possible to reconstruct and deduce a large part of ancient Marcionism through what later critics, especially Tertullian, said concerning Marcion.
Marcion declared that Christianity was distinct from and in opposition to Judaism. He rejected entirely the Hebrew Bible and declared that the God of the Hebrew Bible was a lesser demiurge, who had created the earth, but was (de facto) the source of evil.
The premise of Marcionism is that many of the teachings of Christ are incompatible with the god of the Jewish religion. Focusing on the Pauline traditions of the Gospel, Marcion felt that all other concepts of the Gospel, and especially any association with the Old Testament religion, were opposed to, and a backsliding from the truth. He further regarded the arguments of Paul regarding law and gospel, wrath and grace, works and faith, flesh and spirit, sin and righteousness, and death and life as the essence of religious truth. He ascribed these aspects and characteristics to two principles, the righteous and wrathful god of the Old Testament, who is at the same time identical with the creator of the world, and a second God of the Gospel, quite unknown before Christ, who is only love and mercy. Marcion gathered scriptures from the Jewish tradition, and juxtaposed these against the sayings and teachings from the Gospel of Luke, the Epistles of Paul (but not the Pastoral Epistles or the Epistle to the Hebrews), and the added Marcionite Epistle to the Laodiceans, in a work entitled the ‘‘Antithesis’‘. Marcion’s version of Luke did not resemble the version that is now regarded as canonical. It not only lacked all prophecies of Christ's coming and had differences with the now canonical version, as well as other serious theological implications. In bringing together these texts, Marcion redacted what is perhaps the first attempt at a New Testament canon on record, which he called the Apostolikon, which reflected his belief in writings associated with the apostle Paul and Jesus.
After Marcion’s excommunication, elements of his movement continued in the Mediterranean west for about 300 years, and in the east for some centuries more, principally in areas outside of the Eastern Roman empire that followed Manichaeism.

Monarchianism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Monarchianism, sometimes called Monarchism, is a heretical theological movement that arose within the second and third century Church. It consists of a set of beliefs that emphasize God as being one, that God is the single and only ruler.
This emphasis conflicted with the doctrine of the Trinity, of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Models of resolving the tension between the two principles in favour of God's oneness were proposed in the 2nd century but rejected as heretical by the Church.
Monarchianism in and of itself is not a complete theory of the relation of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but a simple tenet that requires further extension. There are basically two contradicting models of Monarchianism:

• Modalism considers God to be one person appearing and working in the different "modes" of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The chief proponent of Modalism was Sabellius, hence the view is also called Sabellianism. It has also been labeled Patripassianism by its opponents because it purports that God the Father suffered on the cross.
• Adoptionism holds that God is one being, above all else and wholly indivisible and of one nature, it reconciles the "problem" of the Trinity (or at least Jesus) by holding that the Son was not co-eternal with the Father, and that Jesus essentially was granted deity-hood (adopted) for the plans of God and his own perfect life and works. Different flavors of Adoptionism hold that Jesus was "adopted" either at the time of his baptism, or ascension. An early exponent of this belief was Theodotus of Byzantium.

Several early heretics of this persuasion were Natalius, an early Patripassianite, and Paul of Samosata, who however does not neatly fit in either of the two models.

Montanism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Montanism was a heretical movement that originated about 156 and was named after its founder Montanus. It flourished mostly in and around the region of Phrygia in Asia Minor, where early on its followers were called Cataphrygians. It spread to other regions in the Roman Empire. This heresy arose at a time before Christianity was generally tolerated or legal in the Roman world. With the mainstream of the Orthodox Church prevailing against Montanism, the movement died out within a few generations although the sect persisted in some isolated places into the eighth century.

Differences between Montanism and Orthodox Christianity
The beliefs of Montanism contrasted with Orthodox Christianity in the following ways:

• The belief that the prophecies of the Montanists superseded and fulfilled the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles.
• The encouragement of ecstatic prophesying, contrasting with the more sober and disciplined approach to theology dominant in Orthodox Christianity at the time and since.
• The view that Christians who fell from grace could not be redeemed, in contrast to the Orthodox Christian view that contrition could lead to a sinner's restoration to the church.
• The prophets of Montanism did not speak as messengers of God: "Thus saith the Lord," but rather described themselves as possessed by God, and spoke in his person. "I am the Father, the Word, and the Paraclete," said Montanus (Didymus, De Trinitate, III, xli); This possession by a spirit, which spoke while the prophet was incapable of resisting, is described by the spirit of Montanus: "Behold the man is like a lyre, and I art like the plectrum. The man sleeps, and I am awake" (Epiphanius, "Panarion", xlviii, 4).
• A stronger emphasis on the avoidance of sin and on church discipline than in Orthodox Christianity. They emphasized chastity, including forbidding remarriage.
• Some of the Montanists were also "Quartodeciman" ("fourteeners"), adhering to the celebration of Pascha on the Hebrew calendar date of 14 Nisan, regardless of what day of the week it landed on. The Orthodox held that Pascha should be commemorated on the Sunday following 14 Nisan. (Trevett 1996:202)

Jerome and other church leaders claimed that the Montanists of their own day held the belief that the Trinity consisted of only a single person, similar to Sabellianism, as opposed to the Orthodox view that the Trinity is one God of three persons which Tertullian also had held. There were some who were indeed modalistic monarchians (Sabellians) and some that were closer to the Trinitarian doctrine. It is reported that these modalists baptized mentioning the name of Jesus Christ as opposed to mentioning the Trinity. Most of the later Montanists were of the modalistic camp.

 

Nestorianism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Nestorian view: Christ existed as two persons

Nestorianism is a Christological heresy which originated in the Church in the 5th century out of an attempt to rationally explain and understand the incarnation of the divine Logos, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as the man Jesus Christ. Nestorianism teaches that the human and divine essences of Christ are separate and that there are two persons, the man Jesus Christ and the divine Logos, which dwelt in the man. Thus, Nestorians reject such terminology as "God suffered" or "God was crucified", because they believe that the man Jesus Christ suffered. Likewise, they reject the term Theotokos (Giver of birth to God) for the Virgin Mary, using instead the term Christotokos (giver of birth to Christ) or Anthropotokos (giver of birth to a man).

Patripassianism

From OrthodoxWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Patripassianism is a form of modalism, the teaching that there is only one God, who appears in three different modes. This is opposed to the Orthodox teaching that there is one God, who exists in three persons.
Patripassianism comes from the Latin, and means "the Father suffers." The name refers to the teaching that God the Father suffers on the cross as Son—since the two are different modes of the same person. Patripassianism is closely related to Sabellianism.