"A Kinder Gentler Seraphim"


Ok now for something lighter. I decided to use my artistic vision to come up with an avatar for seraphim of the ooze, which is substantially less scarey and more realistic than the one he made, and.... Ta Da! Here is its.


This is in reference to the "Annimate Yourself" discussion thread on the ooze.

http://www.theooze.com/forums/discussions.cfm?forumid=16&topicid=261468&bookmark=41


The following portrait of course made with "Portrait Illustration Maker"

http://illustmaker.abi-station.com/index_en.shtml

New Advent defintions of Church Fathers defintion (and my own explanation)


I've been a big fan of the Catholic web site New Advent.org and tend to use it for lots of different kinds of Church reasearch, because it has such an nice handy compilation of Church fathers writings and a great search engine full of articles on various church history and biblical topics.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/


In the area of the Church Fathers it is really important to define how we look at them. Because while some Church Fathers are considered great shining saints, others are considered more like king Solomon (very bright people, who made great contributions, but basically "back slid" later in life).


or as New Advent more precisely describes three requirements for "Church Fathers"

1) orthodox doctrine and learning;
2) holiness of life;
3) (at the present day) a certain antiquity.


But it has been recognized that there have been certain people that have made great great contributions to Christianity, and didn't exactly fit this strict criteria perfectly at least. So the Church has generally made a distinction between "saints". People who have fit the criteria. And others who have made contributions but basically left the faith, by joining a heretical sect, such as Montanism, Manicheanism, the Donatists. etc.


And when reading the Church Fathers it is really easy to tell which person is regaded as saintly figure, vs. those who are just regarded as being very learned, insightful, and so on.

Typically the saintly ones are given a title. i.e - St. Gregory the Illuminator, Clement of Alexandria, ...

While the ones that are just considered learned people who made a contribution to Church doctrine and so on are just called by their name with no title. i.e. - Origen, Irenaus, Tertullian, Tatian...


Ok we finally will talk about Clement of Alexandria he is one of these saints that is a "Category buster", we consider him a saintly father, but Catholics have removed him from that category (way back in the 900s I believe), and I don't know how he stands with the EO.


http://illustmaker.abi-station.com/index_en.shtml

Reading the Church Father's "Alone"



“We must read the fathers in their context. And they must always be weighed against the Holy Scriptures. The Bible doesn't stand alone, but neither do the fathers either.”
Chuck, from the "Mycopticchurch.com", message board.


I like that quote of Chucks quite a bit. It came at a time when a person was beratting the Coptic stance on birth control. And basically accused us of being too liberal. That person I think was a former Catholic, turned Coptic, and really believes all birth control is a sin. While we believe that it acceptable for "Family planning", but couples shouldn't use it to dispense with having kids altogether. (during the early to mid 50s when the pill came out there was a meeting of the bishops to discuss how the Church should deal with it and that was the outcome, rather than the extreme stance that the Catholic Church took regarding this issue).

Anyway this critic posted a few dozen biting church fathers quotes and did everything but out and out accuse us of apostasy, for taking a more moderate stand on the issue. Which is where Chuck's comment came in, regarding not reading the Church Fathers "Alone", and he dealt with various issues going on regarding that issue.


Anyway on this issue andmany other ones it's very important to not read them "Alone". Besides the sciptures in their Judeo context, I would also other things like Holy Tradition and Canon Law that even the Fathers had to observe. Anyway now with that said, we probably will proceed to discussing Clement of Alexandria tomorrow or the day after.

Origen and Origenism, Into


If you really want to trace where this doctrine first took root, you really have to go back to some our great seminal Alexandrian theologians.


Origen especially, but even his mentor (Who still is considered in good standing with the Church), Clement of Alexandria.


And of course I will be reading, quoting, and commenting on these official Coptic essays about Origen.

http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/patrology/schoolofalex/IV-StClement/index.html


http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/patrology/schoolofalex2/


Here is a list of points/assertions that will be made down the road.

1) The way the Church santioned the use of Platonism/ neo Platonism, and other Greek philosophy. My contention is that this heresy is basically a "platonic take on the Gospel", rather than using Platonism or other philosophy in the service of Chrisitanity (as is seen with doctrines like the Trinity, hypostatic union etc.).


2) There exists various rebuttals to Origen from Ecclesiastical authorities, some of which take place even during his own life. And these constitute a proof, that his assertions "do not represent Apostolic tradition".


3) Apopoatic Theology. lol this is a term I often mis-spell, but I'm refereing to the negatic theology. Defining God in negative terms (i.e. God is without sin), rather than positive terms (i.e. God is holy). As anyone studying Orthododxy will find out shortly enough the Faith is rich with kind of thinking. And as I've explained in other threads, etc. there are very good psychological reasons for this (The biggest is a notion that humans get that if they can clearly name of define something then they understand it. When applied to God this gets particularly bad. it basically changes God into more of a god).

Anyway as we will explore later on, many respectable saints do lean to a soft ammount of Universal Reconcilliation. I say soft, because they don't state if dogmatically as many true Universalists do. And I will submit that that is "ok" when we consider the Apophoatic framework. And will hopefully show how this is much different than what Universalists do and say.


4)Theological Developement. Will also be another thing to be explored. There are many attempts to justify Universalism that do not take this into account at all. Or they assume it on their end, but ignore the possibility on the end of Traditional dogma.


Anyway we got lots more to talk about!


http://illustmaker.abi-station.com/index_en.shtml

The problem of the 1200 year gap


As we will see more and more, there are lots of problems with Universal Salvation. But one to talk about in passing, as we think about the previous posted material, (and I do my last bit of blogging before I turn in) is the problem of the 1200 year gap. That's not an exact figure, but a guesstimation.


Anyway here's the situation.


This dogma (outside of some vague mystical saying of Orthodox saints etc.) basically disappears off the face of the map for well over a millenia. And I am getting way ahead of myself since I haven't even talked about Origen and Origenism yet....


But Origenism seems to dieout sometime after 553 in the EO, and from what I can tell within the Coptic Church much sooner.


From a dogmatic standpoint this raises a problem with the teaching when we consider such things as apostolic succession, the nature of Paradosis (Holy Tradition), and the Catholicity of the Church (Which isn't just being everywhere but is the Church "At very time" not just every place) and even more importantly what we know about God and his faithfulness to perserve a "Chosen Remnant", "To keep his promises" and so on.


These notions and idea that Universal Salvation is somehow the "Truth of God" that disappeared from the Church goes against such verses as:



16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, F32 and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.


1 Corinthians 3:11-15
11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13 each one's work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one's work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone's work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward.


Isaiah 1:9
Unless the Lord of hosts Had left to us a very small remnant, We would have become like Sodom, We would have been made like Gomorrah


Ezekiel 6:8-10
8 "Yet I will leave a remnant, so that you may have some who escape the sword among the nations, when you are scattered through the countries. 9 Then those of you who escape will remember Me among the nations where they are carried captive, because I was crushed by their adulterous heart which has departed from Me, and by their eyes which play the harlot after their idols; they will loathe themselves for the evils which they committed in all their abominations. 10 And they shall know that I am the Lord; I have not said in vain that I would bring this calamity upon them."


1 Kings 19:

13 So it was, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle and went out and stood in the entrance of the cave. Suddenly a voice came to him, and said, "What are you doing here, Elijah?" 14 And he said, "I have been very zealous for the Lord God of hosts; because the children of Israel have forsaken Your covenant, torn down Your altars, and killed Your prophets with the sword. I alone am left; and they seek to take my life."

.....

"18 Yet I have reserved seven thousand in Israel, all whose knees have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him."

http://illustmaker.abi-station.com/index_en.shtml

An excerpt from "THE UNIVERSALIST CHURCH OF AMERICA" Robert Cummins


http://online.sksm.edu/univ/writings/cummins_uca.html


"We are not merely a company of men and women seeking to build another denomination. Most churches attempt to justify their separate existence by identifying their own organization or their particular faith with that of the "primitive church"- the church as it was during the early centuries of the Christian era; but such basis for separateness is scarcely tenable. The scholarly research of so eminent and unbiased a student as the late Canon B. H. Streeter 2 of Queens College, Oxford, proves beyond doubt that the early church possessed no single, distinct form, that its forms were many and varied, and that, while any one of today's churches might rightly claim to be patterned after one or another of the early churches (for there were several, not just one, so also might every other. In any event, what virtue would there be in such a claim, even were it true? Five of the seven schools extant in those early days were Universalist in their sympathies. Therefore, theologically, we may be said to have been in the majority and holding the "orthodox" viewpoint; but it would not occur to us to claim our right to separate existence today by reason of the situation which then prevailed."

Nor is it true that we are a people who merely "don't believe." The technique just referred to leads inevitably to the conclusion that there are some things we do not believe. Such matters as those over which, down across the years, the Christian Church has fought, bled, and all but died -belief in the Trinity, the Virgin Birth, the Immaculate Conception, miracle-working power of the Sacraments, literal interpretation of all portions of the Old and New Testaments-any and all of these, most Universalists do not accept; but we do not make the grave mistake of prescribing that our people shall not accept them. They may or they may not, as they choose; and, therefore (significantly), they do not. We hold a man's relationship with God is too sacred a thing to be tampered with from without. After all, who are we-who is anyone else-to dictate the terms of such relationship? As a matter of fact, such beliefs make no real difference anyway,-no difference, that is, morally and ethically. They are matters of opinion only and have nothing to do with richness of character, personal or social, which should constitute the primary concern of the church.

Universalism did begin as a protest, and properly so; but it was a moral protest, theological in form. There were in those early days a few souls who had the courage to rise up in protest against what they conceived to be a cruel, Moloch-worshiping Calvinism, and to call the Christian world back to Jesus' conception of God as Father of all His Creation. Universalists were the protestants of the Protestants, branded as heretics and rebels; but they proved to be in the vanguard of theological thought, pioneers in social reform, gadflies to themselves and others, one of the most humanitarian movements in the history of the Christian Church.3 Yet all this is only a lesser aspect of the thing we are banded together to do.


It is our judgment we are different; but we are not so simply because we wish to be. We are different because the very logic of the situation makes it inevitable. Universalism, by the very nature of the case, is an inclusive gospel. Universalist Fellowship is inclusive in character, that is, any exclusion is self-exclusion. We attempt to stand not only for a more liberal kind of religion, but for a point of view so radically at variance with most of the existing faiths as to make ours a different religion. The conception we have of the Church itself is fundamentally unlike that held by most of the established institutions of religion.


Orthodoxy (by this we mean that phase of religious life which includes both Catholic and Protestant friends) conceives of religion as constituting a body of truth to be believed. There may be differences of opinion as to what the truth is, and there may be an endless variety of interpretation of the same truth; but, beneath all opinions and interpretations, there is common agreement that religion is inevitably associated with a body of truth.


(I quoted the most objectionable from an Orthodox standpoint the writer goes on later to describe such things as disagreement with original sin, etc. that actually puts him closer to Orthodoxy concerning theosis, the nature of humans created in the Divine Image, etc.).

What's the history of the this movement (Universalism).


Universalism is pretty much an American Protestant phenomenon. It however does an ancient church, precedent, being very much akin to "Origenism". While the Universalists are in most ways Sola Scripturists of a different kind, many of them have studied the early church, and found a kind of vindication for their beliefs there.


Wikipedia has some pretty good write ups describing the basic history of the movement.

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

Wiki defintition of Universalism

"In Christianity, Universalism, Universal reconciliation, or universal salvation, is the doctrine that all will be saved. Among theologians the doctrine is often referred to using the Greek word apocatastasis. The doctrine addresses the problem of Hell and notions of God's mercy and justice. Universalists contend that a loving God would not submit anyone, regardless of his or her sins or beliefs, to everlasting torment. Some also argue that eternal condemnation in Hell, an infinite punishment, is not proportionately just with any number of essentially finite sins. Scriptural support includes Biblical passages such as 1 Corinthians 15:22 and Revelation 5:13. Some universalists, sometimes called "strong universalists," hold that all creatures, including demons and even Satan himself, will eventually be saved. In North America, some adherents formed the Universalist Church, which in 1961 merged with the American Unitarian Association to form the Unitarian Universalist Association."


Highlights of Wiki history of this movement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universalist_Church


"In America, Universalism developed from the influence of 4 sources of the Pietist movement in Europe: (1)the Protestant pietist movement --The Society of Friends, Moravians, Methodists, Lutherans, Schwenkfelders, Brethren, and others.
The earliest expressions of Universalism in America were clearly “Pietistic,” a term which simply refers to the religion of the heart. They were most often German. And they were more firmly rooted in the Mid-Atlantic states than New England, though Rhode Island had a goodly share of Pietists."


Universalism seems to have begun in this country in the 1750s. Wiki relates that "At it's peak in the 1830s, the Universalist Church was around the 9th largest denomination in the United States." While this church/creed has been on the decline, it seems to be gaining new life in a different form, the called Postmodern/ Emergent church movement, with some leaders embracing a new packaged version of it.

Basic Starting Premise


"But if there be any (heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their BISHOPs, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner that [that first BISHOP of theirs] BISHOP shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men, ùa man, moreover, who continued stedfast with the apostles. For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter. In exactly the same way the other churches likewise exhibit (their several worthies), whom, as having been appointed to their episcopal places by apostles, they regard as transmitters of the apostolic seed. Let the heretics contrive something of the same kind. For after their blasphemy, what is there that is unlawful for them (to attempt)? But should they even effect the contrivance, they will not advance a step. For their very doctrine, after comparison with that of the apostles, will declare, by its own diversity and contrariety, that it had for its author neither an apostle nor an apostolic man; because, as the apostles would never have taught things which were self-contradictory, so the apostolic men would not have inculcated teaching different from the apostles, unless they who received their instruction from the apostles went and preached in a contrary manner. To this test, therefore will they be submitted for proof by those churches, who, although they derive not their founder from apostles or apostolic men (as being of much later date, for they are in fact being founded daily), yet, since they agree in the same faith, they are accounted as not less apostolic because they are akin in doctrine. Then let all the heresies, when challenged to these two tests by our apostolic church, offer their proof of how they deem themselves to be apostolic. But in truth they neither are so, nor are they able to prove themselves to be what they are not. Nor are they admitted to peaceful relations and communion by such churches as are in any way connected with apostles, inasmuch as they are in no sense themselves apostolic because of their diversity as to the mysteries of the faith.

Tertullian, "On Prescription against the Heretics",32 (c.A.D. 200),in ANF,III:258

http://illustmaker.abi-station.com/index_en.shtml

Just What Does Orthodoxy Have to say about "Universalism", aka "Universal Salvation", etc.


Introduction.


Well decided to get together a few basic points for an essay. And will try to develope them more in future posts. And from there I most likely will talk to some of the theologically inclined folks at Orthodoxychristianity.net (Some of which are Seminarians at Orthodox seminaries like St. Vlads etc.). This topic already has been covered directly or indirectly a good 14 times or so in my absence, but some of ideas, questions, and assertions haven't been brought up before. So I will probably start a whole new thread talking about if from another angle.


(I almost actually cancelled this project because of point 1) & 4) combined).


1) It's not our problem. It's basically a Protestant problem. And arises from Protestant ways of doing things, especially when it comes to willfully going against established Church Dogma.


2) It however is a confusing issue, depending on how you define it. So while there is an aspect that is heretical, certain people such as Kallistos Ware, many Church Fathers, the current Ecumenical Patriarch, and myself could be considered Universalists just because we have some vague hope that God might show some kind of mercy for those people who are outside the Church and Faith in the afterlife.


3) Universalists are right on much of their depiction of Church history. While I would love to make it black and white for the sake of simplicity, church history and theology is often gray and/or checkered.


4) Universalists however are extremely dismissive of the way the Church has handled dogmatic teaching. They use strawmen tactics, false analogies and other under handed means to support their personal dogma. As much as any Protetant who says, "The Church became pagan after Emperor Constantine came to power".

Universalists also use a reverse method to proove their point. Or more exactly, in areas of Epistemology, Law, and science, the burden of proof is always on the person making the claim. Universalists (like many Protestants and others) will attempt to shift the burden of proof over to the establishement. That it up to us to proove that their dogma is wrong and of course willfully dismissing all the things are infact brought up.

In this way, Strong Universalism (as opposed to a vague hope of it as shown by many Orthodox) personifies "heresy". Heresy as one Orthodox priest defined it, "Is not just believing a wrong doctrine" (anybody can do that), a heretic is a person who stubbornly clings and insists on a doctrine, even after being showm "time and time again that they are wrong". It stubbornness, literally "Choosing" in the greek. The word first came to be used for the forming of sects/ political parties in Judaism, and now it stands for those who choose to "Go there own way", as that old 70s band, "Fleetwood Mac" use to sing.


5) Many Universalists groups are heretical in other ways. They deny such things as the Inspiration of Scripture, The Trinity, the Divinity of Christ, the Virgin birth and many other dogmas held by not only Orthodox Christians, but even by many liberal Protestants. This last point to me really says it all. (I don't think I will talk about it seperately, but it will be discused in terms of point 4). ).

http://illustmaker.abi-station.com/index_en.shtml

My first Apology!


(No Gina and I did not get into a fight. heh heh). I'm getting excited. I think I'm going to be writing my first out and (formal) Apology. Most likely called, something like

"The First Apology of Addai of Alexandria" to fit that old Apostolic naming convention.


The Topic it will be on is

"Universal Reconcilliation", based on the content of this web site

http://www.drewc.net/


Which was created, administered and promoted by an online acquitenance.


Some of my starting source material is from here

"Origen and Origenism"

(but most of it is in my nogin).

(As posted on the ooze in answer to deacon Raphael)


Actually about to blog on this, but will answer it here instead. Comparative fasting between Copts and EO. Fasting is one of those interesting "little differences" that Vincent of Pulp Fiction talks about in the first scene of that movie (the interesting cultural differences that makes Europe feel different then the US).So yes we got Fish Fasts, Nativity, the Apostles and one other one in Summer, Assumption of Mary maybe. But our Fasting by and large is much more simple than yours.


We got "Major Fasts", wednesday and Friday, The Great Lent, and the "Fast of Jonah" that we just had. Those are vegan. While the other ones are the fish ones. And of course you fast 9 hours before Divine Liturgy (if taking Communion). But that includes time sleeping for Sunday Service or early morning weekly service. That is assuming you go to bed before midnight, otherwise you should knock of snacking around midnight or earlier if going to an extra early service.But we don't have all those crazy, "you can have wine this day, and olive oil this other day" stuff. And olive oil and wine are not regulated. So one Lenten option I am strongly considering is pesto sauce made without cheese. And other Italian sauces made with olive oil, like those ones made with sun dried tomato, capers etc.


One drawback of Coptic fasting. We do more fasting then any other Apostolic era Church, from what I hear. So while we fast on most of the same days you do. We got some bonus days thrown in, because the bishops have added some prepretory fast days for Lent and Advent (Actually we fast 3 days before the advent fast), we also celebrate a fast/feast or two extra that you don't. Like the Fast of Jonah/ Nineveh. That may be the only "Bonus" one we observe that you don't. Besides fasting to commemorate "The Moving of El Mokotam" before the advent fast beginsAnd well the El Mokotam thing is interestingfrom Wikipedia

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

"The Caliph Al-Muizz used to invite different religious leaders to debate in his presence. In one of those meetings in which Pope Abraam and a Jew named Yaqub (Jacob) Ibn Yusuf Ibn Killis were present, the Pope got the upper hand in the debate. Plotting to take revenge, Ibn Killis quoted the verse where the Lord, Jesus Christ, said in Matthew 17:20: "If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to the mountain, Move from here to there, and it will move, nothing will be impossible for you" and demanded that the Pope proves that his religion is right by means of this.The Caliph saw in this a unique opportunity and asked Pope Abraam to move the Mokattam Mountain. If they proved unable to do so, it would be the proof that the religion of the Christians was wrong and the Caliph would be done away with them completely.And so, after three days of prayers and fasting by the Copts throughout Egypt, Pope Abraam was directed by the Holy Virgin Mary (in an apparition of her to him) to choose St. Simon to mediate for moving the Mokattam Mountain. On the set day, as the people, with St. Simon the Tanner among them, were saying Kyrie eleison (Lord have mercy), the mountain was thrusting up and down, and the sun could be seen from under it. After the miracle was performed in the presence of the Caliph, the Pope turned left and right looking for St. Simon the Tanner, but he had disappeared and no one could find him (a sign of the saint's great humility)."

Have a Blessed Ginatines day! As well as a blessed "Feast of Christ Entering the temple"


Yesterday, the regularly scheduled Valentines day was pre-empted by the "Fast of Jonah" aka "The Fast of Nineveh" (celebrating the the three day shadow/type of Jonah's being in the whale's belly of Christ in the tomb. And if your our sister Church, the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch, or there eastern nestorian cousins, and I think even the Maronites. I believe it even would pin point the founding of the Apostolic see/s out in such eastern places in the Persian empire. One of which actually is Nineveh).


So instead of doing the regular Valentines day, we did the fast day with certain Valentines day flourishes, and the remaining portion of Valentine's day has been transfered over to today. Which I proclaim as Ginatines day, which also coincides with the liturgical holiday of Christ entering the temple (to be circumcised/ dedicated).


But all of this grandstanding aside. This is all a setup for those questions you keep hearing "We fast on this day do you Copts do that?" So I' hopefully tomorrow, which is the Feast of Nineveh (The Fast of Nineveh, which should be a full three day fast,is only two days this year. Basically got pre-empted by Christ arriving in the temple. Which had happened because by the way they reckon these things this is one of those special irregular, leap-year like years) will get around to doing a little compare and contrast between "The Coptic Way" and the way those other Orthodox guys do things.

Have you heard of "Joomla"? To James Nee and other web heads out there I'm asking this question.


Before subjecting my best friend to Brian Mclaren, and the Purple People Eater blathering. He spoke to me about this site.

http://joomla.com/


As a way of beefing up my online Addai of Alexandria experience(He describes it as a "Content Manager" I think). Although technically I would be hosted from our SBC account (not blogger etc.).


Oh and he thought that the Purple guy's podcast in application "was very smart". I think that might be something inline with what he would consider doing.

Is there ever any possibility of justifiable homicide during the liturgy?


I pondered this question during church today. Possibly one more sin, to pile on an ever growing list of ones for that much, much over due confession....


But the noise was particularly bad today. And you hear it especially when you sit in back. Which I was today.


It sounded kind of like this........


Fr. Salib: Make us all worthy, O our Master, to partake, of your holies unto za purification of our souls, our bodies and our spirits. That we may become one body and one spirit, and may have a share and an inheritance with all za saints who have pleased you since za beginning. Remember, O Lord, za peace of your one, only, holy, catholic and apostolic church.

(Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Thump!) (Bang!) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp)

DEACON: Pray for the peace of the one holy catholic and apostolic Orthodox church of God.

(Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp)


CONGREGATION: (Thump thump thump) Lord have mercy (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp)



Fr. Salib:: This which you have acquired unto yourself with the precious Blood of your Christ. Keep her in peace, with all za Orthodox bishops who are in her. Foremost, remember, O Lord, our blessed and honoured father, za archbishop our patriarch Abba......

(Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp)

DEACON: Pray for our high priest Papa Abba..., pope, and patriarch and archbishop of the great city of Alexandria; and for our Orthodox bishops.

(Stomp) (thump) Stomp) (thump)

CONGREGATION:Lord have mercy. Kirie Eleyson.

(Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp) (Stomp)



We've had different discussions on "The Arab Mind". Especially in reference to church. There was a great article written by a Southern (American) convert to the Antiochian church.

http://southern-orthodoxy.blogspot.com/2004/05/orthodoxy-in-dixie.html


And it even supplied some fodder for an ooze thread on culture (especially clashes) in church life.


Anyway it just seems to me that that arabs, can be way to loose on letting their kids run rampant in public. Some of this can't be helped; namely because we have no nursery. But I really think a lot of it can (my dad would have wrung my neck back in the day for stuff much less obnxious). And of course, this also caused us some problems with the neighbors as well...


But in church today, after some minutes of annoyance I realized it best to "make lemonade out of those sour lemons". And decided that attempting to recreate the experience in a blog post, might be fairly funny.

:)

Orthodox Urban Legends


I was chucking over a discussion about an event that appears to be an urban legend. And a very colorful one at that. (A dismembered Arab sheikh raised from the dead after visiting an Orthodox convent - newspaper). I thought the story and discussion was just to good to not share with you guys. It's like an issue of"The Weekly World News" for Eastern Christians.


http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=8141.0

The Emergent Alan Alda


I decided to do some more reading up on some of the new crazes sweeping the Church world today. And of course reading Gina's blog got me interested in Brian Mclaren, and this huge Universal Salvation fad (heresy) that seems to be sweeping the Church world today.


As my best friend Stan loves to call it "Attack of the Unitarians", or "Revenge of the Unitarians" (that Unitarianism has basically co-opted the liberal evangelical movement).


Anyway in doing so, it reminded me of yet another gripe. Also something before discussed with the GF. Namely Getting a straight answer from this guy!

I mean sheesh I've never seen a person waffle on an issue, give "non-answers", or give huge answers filled with a host qualifiers so much that you almost forget the original question... than this guy does. It really reminds me of the Alan Alda, sensitive guy thing of the seventies. Which is another aspect of persona that he really seems to give off. I actually think that is one of the big reasons for the run around. Because of notions of 1970's compassion and sensitivity.


Of course being so on this extreme really means he cannot take any real side on an issue. Even if an issue is a trurely important one. Furthermore, some of his followers do the same mealy mouth crap. I recall a number of months ago. A young woman was seriously considering joining a "Christian Wiccan group" (A group that deliberately mixes Christianity with Celtic pagan practices).

As folks might guess that know me, being the fire breathing dragon of Orthodoxy, I was very much openly against it. And for many, detailed reasons given on that chat thread. There however was a minister who was a Brian fan who basically rebuked me for how close minded I was. I however unduanted turned the tables on him. And proceeded to question him. Because in rebuking me, he actually seemed to be giving a kind of passive support for such New Ageness. And I wanted to know for the record if that was true. Did he support or think was acceptable, or ok, to be mixing Christian services with occult rituals.


After being poked many times with sharp pointy head sticks. I finally got him to respond that "No I would not support such a thing. I would advise for people to stay away from the Occult"

But let me tell you it took a lot of prodding.


And that is the exact problem going on in Emergent Evangelism today. It's the old cliche of "being so open minded that your brains have fallen out". The only times these people really speak out is on politically safe, liberal subjects.

Anti-Bush, War in Iraq, the cost of medical care is to high.... That sort of thing. But if it comes to other things like the importance of the Virgin Birth in our understanding of Jesus as Messiah and God incarnate. Well on those issues they may have the same back bone of a Jelly Fish.

Free Business Cards


Well I was inputing the last of the leads that we got at the trade show. And noticed the back of one of them (Since many cards now days have info on both front and back).

It said that this card was printed for free at http://www.freewebs.com/vistaprintings/


The card itself was distinctive (Although the lady had a weird formating in one section that I think was a big drawback). Anyway since I'm doing things "on the cheap" I decided to keep that lead and pass it on to any others, who need cards, but have trouble ponying up the dough.


Without going through the process. It looks like they give 250 cards, you pay for shipping, and most likely, since you got your first 250 with them. You will favorably inclined to keep buying from them in the future. (So basically the free cards is an alternate form of advertising, they are paying the cost of attracting new customers to you the consumer, rather than an add agency. Since it is often cheaper to do so. Plus word of mouth is the best advertising their is).

Garden of Eden-like place found


Stan told me of this story which appeared on the drudge report


http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article343740.ece

Meet The Press



Some reporters we met along the way, at the Fancey Food Show.


Article about the show, (including 1 paragraph mention about us)
http://www.insidebayarea.com/food/ci_3464283


Faith Kramer
http://www.clickblogappetit.blogspot.com/

http://www.sugarsavvy.net/


"Beth"
http://www.thenibble.com/home/index.asp


Ada Chow
http://www.chowmag.com/


(Saveur reporter)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005N7SL/102-9366017-5302505?v=glance


as well as a few other magazines, local reporters, and free lancers.

4 Things (under construction)


4 Jobs you have had in your life.

(Too many...), but most recently


1) Beta coordinator / Software tester
2) starving church planter/worker
3) Chocolateire, and other work in gourmet cocoa
4) providing living assistance for a developmental disabled and behavioral problematic young man.


4 Movies you can watch over and over

1) LOTR
2) Staw Wars universe flicks
3) Saving Private Ryan (as wellband of brothers movie and miniseries).
4) Monty Python films


4 Places I have lived (all in California)

1) Ridgecrest & China Lake Naval Weapons Center(mojave desert) , where most of our country's "smart weapons" were first invented

http://www.high-desert-memories.com/

http://www.nawcwpns.navy.mil/

2) Bakersfield (Agriculural city)

3) Santa Cruz (where Hawaiian royalty first introduced the mainlanders to surfing. Also place where organic & health food first went big)

http://www.305beachstreet.com/santacruz.html


4) "Silicon Valley" (west San Jose, and Campbell), Where microchips, personal computers etc. were first invented.


4 TV shows

1) Babylon 5 on DVD (Gina and are going through the first 4 seasons, but omitting season 5 due to weak acting and writing)
2) "The Prisoner" on DVD (Same story, but finished it)
3) "The Sopranoes" (same story, but finished it. Season 6 is being produced as we speak.. More of a guilty pleasure because some of the strong content of the show. But stories, acting etc, have always been excellent).
4) lots of ones could be a fourth one. I am considering some seasons of the X files and Millenium, for "TV with Gina time".


4 favorite foods (besides the usual western American fair that we all love, like pizza, burritos, etc.). I realize I miss a lot of Eastern/Central european food from my family background.

1) Svegedely Ghoulosh with egg noodles. and other Slovakian stews and noodle dishes, like Perkault, Poprickosh, Strogannoff etc. with Spaetzle, etc.

2) mom's Chicken Parmisian

3) King Ludwig's Torte

4) Hungarian Plum Dumplings


under construction more to follow

(will work on tagging blogs a little later, and will throw in some links to places I've lived, Tv shows and what not

Trade Show Superstardom


I asked a friend (who worked in our trade show booth), Clark Guittard of a famous local chocolate company/family
http://www.guittard.com/

"What's it like being a Chocolateire Rock Star?"

Because every half an hour or so, he seemed to have some groupies. That wandered by and recognized him, and they came to the booth more to talk to him, then he even for our illustrous cocoa. He being the charming guy that he is, replied back.


"You should know... You're almost there yourself."


Well not quite Clark... But some positive affirmation does go along way. :)


Anyway I figured I would write more on the big Trade show, for Gina and any Food Channel fans. I'm in the process of finishing and polishing the data base with recent contacts, and will post links to some of the more colorful people we met on the way. As a way for Gina to have "the next best thing to being there", since I unfortately wasn't able to get an extra pass for her to see the whole thing herself.


(will be edited, with more added later, or will do another post with more links)

Gnostic Conservatives


A continuation of the 4 times more liberal discussion.... And speaking of the earlier post. One reason, I would think that the ooze is "more off in left field", is due to what I would term "Gnostic Conservatives". sort of an oxymoron, but not quite.


This the concept... IF you look at Gnostic and other similar false teachers in history. You will find that a concept like Gnosticism is a really wide category. It can mean a religious system, that mentions something out of the Bible and Church tradition, but then goes really spinning out into left field. And really has very little in common with Christianity over all.


I would name some of the Heresarchs like Basiliades, and maybe Valentinus like that. While they believed in Yahew, their theological system made him really only a demi god. There were at least two levels of gods above Jesus and Yahew. A supreme being that started the creation of the universe, and then helper gods, that being created to actually do the creation of the universe. All other gods, whether Zeus, Yahew, etc. according to that system are simply creations of those gods. They are 3rd generation of lesser gods, called "demi-urges" etc.


anyway that's an example of really radicle Gnosticism (rooted in more Greek philosophy and myth, than the Judeo Christian tradition).


But not all Gnosticism was that radicle.


Some of it could be a different version of Arianism, adoptionism, etc. with a twist (belieivng in the need for enlightenment from ignorance rather than deliverance and forgiveness from Sin). I can think of actually areas of even the Charismatic movement that are Gnostic like.


anyway I would term these folks as "Gnostic Conservatives". And say some of them, might actually be more conservative (in terms of believing traditional Christian doctrine), then some folks on the ooze.


So what do you think?

Four times more liberal!


Well I'm sure Gina and are going to talk about this in a bit, but figured I would ask any lurker past acquaitnences of mine this question...


I was bored, and decided to pop over to the ooze to see what was up. I actually didn't read any of the threads except one (about which denomination was the first to back pomo).


Anyway I was amazed at what has happened to the place since I pulled out. Just glancing at the thread titles, it just looked to me that "The place has become 4 times more liberal", since i pulled out (Which will be a month come tomorrow).

So I was curious if that was an accurate assessment, or "Just my imagination running away with me"?