“The Church has died many times, but we follow one who knows the way out of the grave.” 🌹✝️❤️

@FirstnameLastname-py3bc

3 жыл бұрын

One true Church (that He established) has not died and will not die untill the end of the days

@lescastor

2 жыл бұрын

@@FirstnameLastname-py3bc Amen. For it is written: "I also tell you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." The Body of Christ only perished once in the course of history and rose again on the third day. This Church is the "pillar and foundation of the truth," and "unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labour in vain."

The concept of theosis has made me rethink Christianity. I rejected social Christianity because it seemed to be an interpretive moral forum. Eastern spirituality, which has its own problematic concepts, inclines toward theosis and that is what appealed to me. I was raised Catholic, but the orthodox commitment to theosis is very compelling.

@pu3he

3 жыл бұрын

I don't think Catholicism explicitly rejects theosis. But I'd agree that it was overgrown by the moralism through the centuries.

@philsdon8932

3 жыл бұрын

@@pu3he Catholicism had loads of mystics. John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila etc. It has subordinated mystery to accessibility. Making saints is now a shameful exercise in pandering. Like it or not, I was born with "mystic" blood. I crave numinosity.

@eldermillennial8330

3 жыл бұрын

@@pu3he Rome had it, of course, in its completeness, before the schism, but the Legalism that grew from the Carolingian puppet popes gradually diluted it.

@eldermillennial8330

3 жыл бұрын

@@philsdon8932 The illusion of Quantity over quality since 1970.

@eldermillennial8330

3 жыл бұрын

If you still value the Western tradition, might I recommend Western Rite Orthodoxy, if it’s at all practical for wherever you happen to live?

“What does thesis feel like?” What does water taste like? Rarely are we aware of the taste of water. But we need it every day, our bodies use it continuously, and sometimes, when we are especially suffering from thirst, we know that nothing can equal it in lifegiving sweetness.

@elektrotehnik94

2 жыл бұрын

*theosis

Love this! Conversation about Theosis is very needed and appreciated! It's interesting how the he said Protestantants get twitchy at the quote: "God became man so that man could become God." An awesome spin on the quote that resonates well with me (and Protestantants that I've talked with) is: "God became the son of man so that man could become sons of God." In the Orthodox view, is it maintained that Christ was fully divine throughout his whole life? And that he didn't "attain" theosis but rather is the perfect example of what theosis would look like for us as he is perfectly glorified the Father?

@MediaDream93

3 жыл бұрын

Yes that's definitely the Orthodox view, they are fully Trinitarian. He is eternally God the Son who then becomes incarnated.

@mamafortuin

3 жыл бұрын

In Orthodox hymns celebrating the Incarnation, we sing, “The uncontainable God was contained in the Virgin’s womb.” So, yes, Orthodoxy teaches Jesus was fully God and fully man from the moment of His conception.

@elektrotehnik94

2 жыл бұрын

Can somebody explain to be the difference in the meaning between the 2 sayings: 1.) "God became man so that man could become God." and 2.) "God became the son of man so that man could become sons of God."? To me, it seems "God became the son of man" to be wrong, as God becoming "the son of man" implies God is not the source of everything. Told otherwise; "God became the son of man" seems wrong in stating that "God - the son of man" came from/ emanated from man(hood)/ humans/ human form as such. God cannot come from man(hood)/ human form, as God is (among other things) the source of everything. Also, I don't see why it would be right to say "so that man could become sons of God.", instead of "so that man could become God." We don't know how far going towards theosis might take us in its limit case/ in its finality. I don't see why anyone can be sure that complete theosis (union) with God can't be possible through His Grace. If people think having a body is the deal-breaker for complete theosis, I believe, in its totality, full theosis that surrenders even our own body to God, along with our spirit, might be possible. Even more, I don't think that you would necessarily completely lose your former body if you surrender it to God, but you might not be limited in your own body anymore, if an explanation using these words makes any sense ^^ I believe understanding the non-dual way of looking at the world helps greatly in the understanding of what I wrote. Buddhist & Hindu teachings succeeded in explaining seeing things in non-duality to me better than any Abrahamic religion has, as of yet. If you try to understand my words while seeing through duality, my words might sound foolish, counter-intuitive or illogical to you. Just a friendly warning.

@philsdon8932

2 жыл бұрын

@@mamafortuin Some say that the Virgin's womb was the new Ark of the Covenant.

@Uthwita

Жыл бұрын

Yes, The Orthodox Church teaches the Christ is fully man and fully God, no this is not what theosis would be like as Christ is God by nature and man cannot participate in the divine nature, we unite with God by participating in the divine energy not the Divine essence. Christ is a perfect example of theosis however because his human nature participates in the divine energy and is always so.

I agree with your description of loving God and others as the "Christian story." I also see the Christian walk as a transformation. But to be clear, this transformation is not a reforming, but a stripping away, becoming emptied, or "dying" only to be raised anew.. We're physically born into God's eternal image and likeness as far as Genesis describes (we don't have to become it). But the physical at the same time encumbers and distracts us with the the sensual (the "flesh"). These two, by nature, are at odds causing offense on our part. So the first couple hid in shame (they were offended) because of their nakedness. (They judged as shameful, what God had already called, "good.") Notice God doesn't challenge their judgment, he challenges their right to make it with his resulting question, "Who told you that you were naked?" As naturally-born partakers of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, we look at this world and make our judgments according to how we feel. The Bible presents a case not of reforming the sensual, but of us ersatz "gods" instead entrusting judgment to the true Creator, thus preempting any offense, with grace. A walk of such faith has us then continually looking at what's been presented in a whole new way.

@elektrotehnik94

2 жыл бұрын

In other words, dissolving (at least) the judgemental certainty a bloated ego brings.

@theTavis01

Жыл бұрын

It is definitely not just a "stripping away", that is why Christians must be born again to inherit eternal life. Adam was the human spirit given in Genesis. Christ is a new spirit for humans given in the Gospel. It's not going back to the old. It is new. The next level. "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new." 2 Cor 5:17

Christ heals mortal being

2:56 you cannot unite someone through love. You cannot unite someone through usage of condemnation. Love does not have binding properties. Love promotes individuation. Love goes on it's own. Love does not create trials. Love does not segregate people. Love goes there where there is allowance for it. Love does not have a price or conditions. Love is not about sacrifice. Love is about nourish.

it feels like wisdom and Truth...

❤❤❤ Thank you Jonathan! ❤❤❤

Also, when you say “forensic declaration” that would be what Protestant call “Justification.” However, the becoming as you say, or the transformation is what Protestant understand to be “Sanctification.” Hope this helps

@timmaloney4216

2 жыл бұрын

Sanctification is not Theosis

@theTavis01

Жыл бұрын

@@timmaloney4216 of course it is though "Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." 1 Thessalonian 5:23

1:48 I haven't met someone like that, I would really love to meet someone like that tho

It was always God's intention to unite with humanity through the Man Christ, even if the fall never happened.

@andrevisser7542

3 жыл бұрын

If the fall didn't happen there would have been no reason or purpose for a "Man Christ".

@jackshadow325

3 жыл бұрын

@@andrevisser7542 Why not? If Christ being a man allows us to truly see and know the Father, in a way we could never have done otherwise, why wouldn't have that been God's plan all along?

@andrevisser7542

3 жыл бұрын

@@jackshadow325, because we would all have the same relationship with our Father that Adam had before the fall, nothing for Christ to restore...

@jackshadow325

3 жыл бұрын

@@andrevisser7542 What evidence is there that Adam's relationship with the Father was better before the fall than what we have now with Christ? With Christ, we are confident that one day we will never fall into sin again. Adam did fall into sin. Adam's pre-fall relationship with God was not something frozen in time never to change. It would have matured into a deeper relationship, a relationship which we now have in Christ. A relationship which Adam too would have had in Christ even if the fall never happened.

@andrevisser7542

3 жыл бұрын

@@jackshadow325, Adam lived with God in God's garden, walked with God, gave the animals their names with God and got the authority to rule the earth also with God.... That sound much better than what we even have today. After Adam's fall man lost his authority to rule the earth (satan took it), lost his sonship and direct connection with God (his spirit "died") and fallen into satan's bondage, the beginning of death etc. Jesus in flesh was a *manifestation of YHVH representing fallen Adam* in his fallen state (flesh) to start the restoration of what Adam had lost. Only after His second coming will we receive back our bodies that original Adam was created with and rule the earth with God again...

"What does it feel like?" Hilarious lol

@lejspul7655

Жыл бұрын

Prelest is a difficult thing to struggle with. The new age psudo-spiritual experiance chasers avoid orthodoxy for this reason.

This was well-said.

Amazing stuff

Johnathan, it's time to get one of those nice radio sounding microphones. Please, that would be amazing.

Very abstract. I’m sure all of these metaphoric definitions help some people tolerate their lives.

@user-yn2ct2ie9m

10 ай бұрын

Yea very abstract. Was it communicable though?

@andyd568

Ай бұрын

Much more, it gives people a reason to live.

Maybe transmutation is the Rapture happening in slow motion, a process through which the substance of our humanness is freed from the rags of sin.

@cryosteam3944

2 жыл бұрын

it’s the final bit of conversion

@JoshAlicea1229

2 жыл бұрын

We are “being” converted. “The old has passed away and all things are being made new.”

i feel it

Theosis is not the preserve of any one Church or denomination - it is as alive in traditionalist Anglican England as it is in Orthodoxy or R C or Baptist churches… A devout and passionate, Bible based Christian of any lineage can be as close to God through Jesus Christ as any other - and the Holy Spirit can take powerfully hold of any one equally. We cannot ‘measure’ these things - but proper devotion is proper devotion and denominational “pride” is not impressive to God if it seeks to belittle the adoration His other children. As the enemy seeks to take hold of this fallen planet we should be strong enough to hold together as different but loving brethren in adoration of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. We all stand united in the His service! From an old English (CofE as WAS) poet seeing out his final chapter in beautiful small town Mexico.

Tina here......We Dont Need Another Hero, We Dont Need too Know The Way Home 🤠

Something behind you there

☦

Without emphasizing the essence energy distinction of G-d one can not explain the fullness of the faith which is Orthodoxy. Pageau as well intentioned but he is sounds like your run of the mill ecumenist, its, all very general oh great Buddah oh great Shiva ...

@mudpuppin3tt3s

Жыл бұрын

An exacting criticism, such that I'm struck by its precision. What clear worded understandability have we here!

Different denominations, different words: theosis, deification, divinization, sanctification, union with God, holiness. . .

@timmaloney4216

2 жыл бұрын

Sanctification is not theosis

@christopherk222

2 жыл бұрын

@@timmaloney4216 That's one point of view.

@timmaloney4216

2 жыл бұрын

@@christopherk222 if you equate the two, then you don't know what Theosis is

@christopherk222

2 жыл бұрын

@@timmaloney4216 😄 Ah ! 😄

@LordJagd

2 жыл бұрын

Those are really not the same thing. So much of Christianity has been lost in translation out of Greek.

Did anyone else notice that Pageau can't really explain Theosis with any specificity.? Transform into what? Become what? Makes you full? makes you light? Makes you free? Makes you stop lying?

@ahorton880

Ай бұрын

"God became man, so that man may become God." -St John Damascus To eliminate any confusion, theosis does not mean we literally become the one God. That would be apotheosis. We always remain created, but we participate in God's divinity through our cooperation with the divine will. This is why God became incarnate as a man, so that by living as a man, His entire life became a creative act of refashioning and healing the sickness in human nature. All that's left to us now, is to continuously cultivate humility so that we have the courage and strength to reject our egosim and live like Christ. In this manner, because He was one of us, we could become like Him. The incarnation is a bridge between our world and the divine. Pride closes this door off and keeps us blind to the divine, only permitting us to see the world according to our senses and pleasures. I hope that helps.

@HaleStorm49

Ай бұрын

@@ahorton880 Well it didn't answer any of the questions that I asked. No one except St. John Damascus can seem to answer the question without an essay.

Maybe oversimplification on my part, so please forgive me, that being said, does the doctrine of Theosis then allow for a return of Jesus Christ as what the book of Revelation seems to say?

@pu3he

3 жыл бұрын

Why would these two things be incompatible?

@betterdaysahead3746

3 жыл бұрын

@@pu3he I'm not saying they are exactly. I'm new to Orthodox Christianity so forgive me, I'm still learning. From what I've gathered so far the emphasis of Theosis is placed on in becoming more like God we bring about God's kingdom on earth, I understand how that could manifest a "new world." What does Theosis say about Jesus Christ actually returning? Do they believe he will return one day? Maybe it's just that I haven't heard Jonathan talk about that detail and that's why it stands out to me.

@OvranoPhanekh

3 жыл бұрын

@@betterdaysahead3746 yes, of course He will return. His return is a Theosis or transfiguration of all things, both us humans in our new bodies and with the recreation of the universe. Christ started world-tranaforming work at His death and resurrection, now Theosis is being processed through the Orthodox Church, and eventually the rest of the world - then Christ will return and bring everything "up to divinity" after He defeats death

@alfredvickers4054

3 жыл бұрын

@@betterdaysahead3746 Christ is always with us, but He will bodily return when the time is right, when it is time for humanity to finally be judged. I've heard it said that in eternity, we will forever become closer to God, ever more like Him, but Theosis allows us to start this process now in this life. At the same time, we end up giving people a glimpse of Heaven or the New Earth and can help inspire others to take the same journey so that more are saved before the end, before it's too late. You could say that Theosis starts the process of changing the world and Man, but Christ will complete it when He returns.

@betterdaysahead3746

3 жыл бұрын

@@OvranoPhanekh thank you for replying, that explanation helps my understanding.

💘

Talk about israel...

Doesn't the serpent in the garden say that you will become like God?

@walrusking148

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, but that’s not a gift that he could give. That’s why the serpent had to convince Eve and Adam to take from the tree by force. He who is not God can not grant someone divinity. They were not ready for the Divine knowledge of Good and Evil, so the consumption of the fruit caused them to gain knowledge that they couldn’t effectively use. This caused them to fall away from God. The tradition of the Church has been that God would have allowed Adam and Eve to eat from the tree when they were ready, but they chose to eat of it before that. Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord,† as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue,† by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.† (2 Peter 1:2-4, OSB)

@pu3he

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, but Eve forgot (or didn't know) to respond that they already have been made in the image of God.

@MediaDream93

3 жыл бұрын

The sin of Adam & Eve was disobeying God's instruction, craving to be like God outside of God's own will. Their sin was to desire to be God without God. Eve should have answered the serpent wisely, "I'm already like God, I'm made in His image and likeness, and I'm in communion with Him. Get out." But they fell for the trick. The image & likeness of God is tarnished when that communion with God is tainted. The gift of Christ is freedom from sin so that we can mend that communion and restore His image in us. 1 Corinthians 6:17 - "But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with Him."

@pu3he

3 жыл бұрын

@@MediaDream93 That's a great answer.

@cowel8734

3 жыл бұрын

So what would we be or what would we be doing if Adam and Eve didn't eat it? Would we just run around the garden shamelessly naked, eating fruit ? I think God made to sin to contrast good. Theres no up without down

FIRST

Just be sincere and say that you're making up your story as you go along, to suit your subjective view. :)

Third.

I think I misunderstand you when you say “we are to become God.” I am praying you mean to become conformed to the image of Christ further as we are United to Him?

@alfredvickers4054

3 жыл бұрын

In Orthodoxy, the theology makes a distinction between essence and energy. The essence of God is what the 3 divine persons share, while the energies of God are how He accomplishes His work in the world. In Theosis, we are united to God through His divine energies, but we of course do not and cannot share His essence. We do not become further hypostases in the Godhead in addition to Father, Son, and Spirit. But by sharing in His energies we can experience divinity, including having wisdom and living forever. We do not get absorbed into God's essence, we remain ourselves as distinct beings from God, but we can share in His divine life by His grace. God became Man so that Man might become God--that is, God took on universal human nature so that He could defeat Death by death, and so that He could sanctify human nature in His resurrection, so that we can one day rise again and share in the divine energies. We don't literally become the God we worship or anything ridiculous like that. But we do become one with God in a sense, because by consuming the bread and wine which are the body and blood of Christ we have His blood flowing through our veins and so we are truly part of His body, and we are united to Him through His energies, but we don't literally become God Himself or another God exactly like Him, we remain human, though a perfected form of human, the humans we were always intended to be as reflections of God. We become one with Jesus, but Jesus is still Himself as a divine person and we are still our own human selves, but sharing in the divine energies by God's grace. It's a little complicated and hard to explain. Saying that we become God is a nice and easy way to sum up the teaching, but for someone without context or explanation it can come across as highly questionable. I hope I explained this well enough. EDIT: Another simple way of thinking about it is this: The Church is the Bride and Christ is the Bridegroom. A man and his wife become one flesh, but there is still a distinction between them. In a similar way, God will be united with His creation, His Bride, but humans will still be distinct from Christ even as we are one in the energies.

@drooskie9525

2 жыл бұрын

@@alfredvickers4054 We will be as Christ was when he was resurrected. So, definitely god-like, but not THE God. Something like a angel, but a higher order of such I think? Not sure if there is a clear distinction. The Bible even says angels look at us with wonder. Paul even said it is not completely understood, but it is something definitely spectacular.

@elektrotehnik94

2 жыл бұрын

@@alfredvickers4054 As far as I see, the problem of why this is hard to explain is because we are using words. Words only exist as a product/ they emanated from duality/ a dual way of seeing the world. As far as I see, the concept we are trying to explain is non-dual in its essence, therefore no words (as they are coming from duality) can capture its essence fully. The essence of a non-dual concept such as this can only be fully conveyed through experiencing it, living (in) it; not conveyed through words. The non-dual concepts are what prayers, meditations, singing, rituals, admiration and communions are trying to get us in touch with. These things seem used for such purpose in most religions as I've experienced them. Different spirituality teaching/ religions put different emphasis/ levels of importance between these types of activities; these activities that try to convey the essence of these non-dual concepts. For me, the non-dual way of seeing things was best explained to me through Hinduism & Buddhism, especially meditations. Had a hard time grasping the non-dual way of seeing through learning from the Abrahamic religions, my ego was getting in the way ^^ & Eastern spirituality helped me get the ego out of the way of progressing in my understanding. As far as I see, some religions try to compensate for the inability of words to convey non-dual concepts through using a larger volume of words --> Trying to capture with a bigger volume of words more of what is ultimately too big/ too vast/ too interconnected & too interdependent to ever be fully captured by words. It's what it seems to me Abrahamic religions do, putting vast amounts of words in a book. It's the reason why these books are so large; because they are trying their best to put into words something that cannot be fully put into words. They are using different angles & metaphors to capture as much of these non-dual concepts as they can.

expirience massive joy while looking depressed all day long is not that fitting isnt it?

00:05 nice fart, also small one on 00:24

Nonsense self-indulgent fantasy.

Yeah, sure... But it ain't that simple, I'm afraid. First, there is not ONE Christian story, as there are many, many different interpretations of what Christianity entails. Second, although it is entirely true that Christian values have had a huge influence on Western culture and civilization, Enlightenment and Modernist values have ALOS had a significant influence on the current version of Christianity. It's not all a one-way street. And finally, the Natural Law is, well, the NATURAL law and is in no absolute need of divine "explanation." Very simplistic discussion, here, basically preaching to the choir. Disappointing.

@alfredvickers4054

3 жыл бұрын

First off, it's a clip from a longer conversation and the full thing is linked in the description if you bother to look. And it is that simple. God created the world and meant for Man to be like Him. The Fall caused Man to drift away from God, and because we are made in the Image of God, Man drifted away from true humanity. Hence all the suffering and death in the world for thousands of years. Yet God made a way for us so that we could still be redeemed, a way for us to become more like Him and in the process become more like ourselves as we were meant to be. The many interpretations of Christianity aren't a problem because at most there can be one objective truth and all contradictory claims fall away. If you study the history of Christianity, Orthodoxy has preserved the teachings and practices of the original Church, as shown when you read the writings of the Church Fathers from the first few centuries. Almost 1000 years ago East and West split, creating the Roman Catholic Church. The Catholics over time added new and unfamiliar teachings (like adding the filioque to the creed which has an effect on theology, or coming up with ideas like Purgatory or Mary's Immaculate Conception) and changed various practices (for example, in Orthodoxy someone is baptized, chrismated, and communed at the same time, but Catholics have for some reason separated these events out by years so that a baby can be baptized but must wait a number of years for the other 2), and of course the big one is the Papacy, where they claim that this one bishop has complete universal authority over the whole Church, even though this was never the case in the first thousand years of the Church. Because of the Catholic leadership's increasing corruption, including indulgences, this led to the Protestant Reformation. Every form of Christianity from here is a form of Protestantism and, as the name implies, is a protest to one degree or another from more traditional teachings and practices. Different groups have such different interpretations of the Bible because they have decided that no Church authority is trustworthy (ignoring the Eastern Churches and their preservation of the teachings of the Apostles) and so every man is his own Pope and can interpret the Bible on his own, and the Bible is the only authority (though in reality it is his own mind which is his final authority since he is the one interpreting for himself based on his personal understanding and preferences, often in ignorance of historical and cultural context of the writings). However, this teaching of Sola Scriptura goes against all reason. It presupposes a particular canon, but the Orthodox Church before any schisms canonized the books of the Bible, deciding which were divinely inspired Scripture while being guided by the Holy Spirit (this process was necessary because there was no other way to know which books of both Testaments were truly Scripture and which weren't otherwise, as there were many differing opinions on the matter until representatives of churches all over the Christian world decided the matter, but even then it took centuries). This canon included the books now known by Catholics and Orthodox as the deuterocanon (or secondary canon). In fact, the deuterocanon was included before the New Testament canon was finalized, as the Book of Revelation was doubted by many until it was finally definitively included in the list of Scriptures, the last book to be included, so it is ironic that Protestants will gladly accept Revelation and their strange interpretations of it (especially the rapture stuff among American evangelicals) but reject the deuterocanonical books as "unbiblical," even though they were technically part of the Bible before Revelation was. Many Protestant groups not only have different doctrines from the historical Church but some teachings bring back things condemned as heresies centuries ago. The chaos of Protestantism led in turn to people deciding they could interpret Scriptures and Christianity in completely new ways, and so groups further removed from the Church Christ founded, like Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses, were born. In the end, if Christianity is true, it can only be Orthodoxy, because all the other groups' teachings and practices can be traced at best back to 500-1000 years ago, while Orthodoxy preserves the Apostles' deposit of faith from 2000 years ago. If Orthodoxy is true, then Theosis is true. Thus there is in fact only one Christian story, and all the others are distortions. Just because there is confusion doesn't mean there is no definitive truth or that that definitive truth can't be known. It does exist and has been known for two millennia. This one true Christianity is increasingly being discovered by Catholics and Protestants who are leaving their old beliefs to come home to a more ancient belief. Yes, modern Christianity has been negatively influenced by the Enlightenment and Modernism, but more and more mistaken Christians are becoming Orthodox as their respective churches crumble around them under the weight of worldliness. The truth is clear once you find it and begin to understand it. Natural law does need an explanation. Nature itself had a definitive beginning, and it couldn't make itself from nothing. It didn't just appear one day. It had to have a creator, which is why all peoples have always believed in one or more creators (and in a Christian view the other religions have distorted understandings of things, confusion deliberately caused by demons, just like with the differing views of Christianity). Without God and without the Christian story, there is nothing to tell us how we should treat each other or why we should do so, and without God nothing is inherently good or bad. And being made in His Image is why we have intrinsic value. These concepts of how things ought to be are meaningless without a cosmic story, such as the story of salvation. In paganism even the gods were slaves to sinful desires, setting a bad example for the people and showing even the divine couldn't escape how messed up the world was, which made the gods hypocrites in punishing humans for their offenses, so there was no definitive "good" or a source of it. Only Christianity provides the ultimate source of Good. Orthodox Christianity is the only religion to fully explain everything: not only why anything exists, why we exist, why the world has an order to it, why everything is so messed up from a personal scale to an international one, why there is confusion in worldviews, etc., but also how it all can be repaired, and what the truth is. Christ is ultimately the answer to it all--Adam brought sin and death into the world, while Christ, the Last Adam, took them away. He created everything and created us in His Image. He wants us to be like Him through Theosis. He is the Ultimate Truth. We still experience sin and death for a time, but they will be done away with in the end, because Christ already won long ago. With paganism, there are no satisfying answers because the worldview is incomplete, missing something, or rather, _Someone._ And in atheism there are no answers, since anything beyond the material is denied. The modern world throwing away Christ has directly led to increasingly devaluing human life in various aspects of society. Christ is the only Answer, and more people are coming to see that.

@nuzzi6620

3 жыл бұрын

If that’s what you’re able to reduce the concepts briefly discussed in this clip to, well, you’re missing the whole point.

@KRGruner

3 жыл бұрын

@@alfredvickers4054 LOL... Okayyyyyy, dude, whatever. Keep wallowing in ignorance, no skin off my back. Petitio ad principii never, ever proved anything. But I suppose logic would not be your strong point...

@KRGruner

3 жыл бұрын

@@nuzzi6620 I'd say YOU are missing the whole point, as shown by your inability to address ANY of the objections I raised. Quite telling.

@alfredvickers4054

3 жыл бұрын

@@KRGruner Yeah, just ignore everything I said so you can feel smug and superior. Believing in Christianity and knowing Church history are not ignorance. Christianity makes sense of everything. You are dismissing everything because of all the confusion in different denominations, but as I showed it's possible to cut through the confusion and find the truth. Concepts of morality and human rights are meaningless and baseless without the divine and without a story that encompasses the cosmos. Otherwise they are delusion or made up by humans to make us feel better. If we are accidents of a series of random processes and nothing has purpose and everything will cease to exist in the end with no one to remember anything, then no one has inherent value, nothing matters, nothing has meaning. So the very idea of natural law would be nothing. Funnily enough, even the Wikipedia article on the subject of natural law includes in its definition the idea that human rights are conferred by God and natural law can refer to religious morality, so why wouldn't it require the divine to explain? Anything else is just baseless nonsense. But sure, keep believing in Nothing and pretending that anything matters or that natural law has any basis in that context. Under the secular view we are just animals operating on instinct. Animals in the wild don't tend to treat each other as having rights. So if there is no God and Christianity is not true, we are just animals deluding ourselves that we are special. Or worse, we are merely meat machines acting on programming, no free will or true thought, making the concept of natural law even more absurd.

666 views lol.

@jackworthington4660

3 жыл бұрын

LOL! haha the funny number