General Q&A About Christianity/Bible

[Let God Arise]

Instead of just posting this to the Orthodox sub-forum, I wanted to hear perspectives from all Christian denominations.

Here's my question: why was OT Israelite tribal descent always traced through the father, while those who follow the rabbinic/pharisaic religion called "Judaism" trace their "authentic jewishness" through the mother? What changed? Why did they flip to the other parent? I think I know the answer, but I want to hear other opinions.

https://christianityfaq.com/what-tribe-was-jesus-christ-from/

 

[Papist]

I honestly couldn't tell you. I always assumed that paternity could not be assured, unlike maternity.

Could it be simply an inversion of the truth? Or that Eve, the original woman, gave into temptation and had us cast out of Eden?

 

[Let God Arise]

My guess is that since the Romans destroyed the 2nd temple, along with all tribal and priestly records, they have no way to legitimately trace their lineage, so like you said, "you always know who the mother is". It's just another way for them to fake being real Judeans/Israelites, since they can't prove it anymore.

 

[BrotherAugustine]

Pharisaic tradition. Judaism is patrilineal in Scripture and matrilineal in the Talmud, one of countless Talmudic inversions of the original Jewish faith. Eitan Bar has a great (though Protestant) book on conflicts between the Talmud and the Torah and this is one of the many points mentioned in that book.

 

[Narekatsi]

Speaking of Talmudic inversions of biblical events, here's a collection of mental gymnastics and lore surrounding Adam & Eve, which ends with Eve being the smarter individual, having actually done what God wanted, by eating the fruit - it includes full timestamps of each event and logs of conversations between God, Adam, and Eve:

 

[StDionysiusTheAreopagite]

Since 1054, is the head of the Catholic Church of Rome legitimate? If not, is there an existing Church operating in the territories led by the Catholic Church of Rome?

 

[Seng Hock]

I want to know what fellow members thought about this.

Which option do you think is the better path?

The first option is to be a supreme purity man of God like Mihailo Tolotos and his friends on Mount Athos. At first glance this is the ultimate goal of our lives on Earth, to serve God and be the instrument of His will. But after closer look, from a certain point of view it looks that Mihailo and his friends on Mount Athos are actually very selfish people. They worshipped God so their souls can be saved from hell, yet they do not care about other people and events outside their monastery. They do not actively help others to achieve their salvation, or doing other tangible things such as giving alms, giving jobs to people in need or even paying taxes. In real life almost no one know Mihailo and friends, and not every Orthodox even knows them. They spend their entire lives secluded in a mountain doing nothing except praying, and consequently they produced almost nothing.

On the opposite we have men who acts like total assholes, but actually they do God's work to the max.
- Maha Vajiralongkorn: he and his ancestors protected his country and millions of people from colonialism and humiliation. Now his country is an advanced industrialized country where millions lives happily ever after. Yes he looks like a jerk by having multiple wives, concubines and harems, and children from multiple wives. Not to mention his tank top and tattoo. But despite his jerk attitude he bears good fruits in the form of protecting and giving prosperity to millions of people.
- Hassanal Bolkiah: He alongside with his brother, Jefri Bolkiah, lives an extravagant life with multiple car collections, multiple wives and harems. They live like Dan Bilzerian and Tristan Tate. But despite all they successfully led their country to peace and prosperity. So this is far bigger than just giving alms and setting up an orphanage.
- Soekarno: He has at least nine wives. He was a natural alpha and has already practiced game far before it became mainstream. He managed to marry his own former landlord and even managed to marry a hot much younger Japanese woman. He supposedly when blackmailed by KGB with sex tape he thinks of it as a compliment and asked for more copies. Despite his lust he gives freedom to millions of people from colonialism and kicked foreigners out of the country. So a lustful man single-handedly managed to do much more than Mihailo and friends with their spiritual superiority.

This is just a few examples. There are more people like this such as Norodom Sihanouk, Rodrigo Duterte, and even Donald Trump. Men of the bible such as David and Solomon even acts like this.

So what do you think? should we become a spiritually pure person that produce nothing or a person which is not too spiritual but produce good fruits?

Personally I lean towards the latter. I think it is OK if we love hot women as long as we do good deeds. But I'm asking for your opinion in case I made a mistake in judgement.

 

[Jeremiah Branch]

Your profile says you are Orthodox. Doesn't that answer the question?

Moreover, no one you list in your second option is even nominally Orthodox let alone how hard they may trying to live a life in line with Orthodoxy.

A longer answer would be that even within Orthodoxy, people have different callings and not everyone is expected to attain to the same level of holiness, although we should all try for it. Mount Athos elders will bless soldiers and people who may have to do unpleasant things. But they would not bless PUAs... This isn't a rocket science question.

 

[Lawrence87]

So what do you think? should we become a spiritually pure person that produce nothing or a person which is not too spiritual but produce good fruits?

You should ask your priest this question. It seems like you are fundamentally wrongheaded simply by the fact that you would even ask this question.

First off a spiritually pure person doesn't produce nothing. Only a materialist would say that. Who is the most pure person in history besides Christ? It is the Blessed Virgin Mother of God. What did her spiritual purity bring? Even on your own terms, she only brought the foundation of Western Civilization into being. Its nonsense to suggest that spiritual purity brings nothing.

The answer is we should strive for purity with an understanding of our flaws. Every man likes hot women. That's why they arent allowed on Athos. Does that mean we give up? No we use our flaws as the basis of humility. God meets us where we are at. He doesn't then say "immediately become absolutely pure". He provides a template for what this looks like and He says "walk with me". Over time and with many falls we start to improve. Men seem to get really stuck on this purity thing. All you have to do is sincerely say "yes" to Christ and get up when you fall. You do not say "nah I'm good, I'll never attain purity and I like it here with the swine anyway"

Pick up your cross bro.

 

[Let God Arise]

Orthodox Christianity and Zionism are Morally Incompatible - Orthodox Reflections

Despite efforts to "link" the two faiths via the phrase "Judeo-Christian", Orthodoxy and Rabbinic Judaism are incompatible in every way.

orthodoxreflections.com

The phrase “Judeo-Christian” is a propaganda slogan, not a statement of truth. Rabbinic Judaism, especially when infused with Zionism, is completely incompatible with Orthodox Christianity in all respects – morally, religiously, and culturally. For that matter, the same applies to Christian Zionism, which is even further afield from Orthodoxy than older, more “mainline” Protestants were until their moral collapse.

 

[Seng Hock]

When I previously posted, I expressed my disappointment with Christianity's numerous self-restrictive rules, which seem to put us at a disadvantage compared to those who don't adhere to Christian teachings.

Take Roosh, for instance. Before converting to Christianity, he was renowned for his exploits with women, teaching men how to attract them. He was a prominent figure in the manosphere, with many followers, and considered one of the red pill kings.

However, after embracing Christianity, he gradually had to unpublish his books, starting with the Bang series, followed by Game and Lady. Eventually, all his books were unpublished, and his websites, including Return of Kings and Roosh V Forum, were taken down. In the end, he unpublished himself from the face of the Earth.

As Christians, we are called to bear our cross, but the numerous self-imposed limitations on enjoying life seem overwhelming to me.

I asked my priest if it was permissible to engage in activities like womanizing, drinking, and gambling while also performing good deeds like giving alms to balance it out. However, we will be judged equally for our sins.

Thus, adopting a lifestyle like the old Roosh, Dan Bilzerian, Dubai sheikhs, or the Tate brothers is off-limits for us Christians.

Yes, following Christ requires self-denial, but we are ordinary people living in the world, not saints residing in heaven or monasteries. I still want to succeed in life before I die.

 

[Lawrence87]

As Christians, we are called to bear our cross, but the numerous self-imposed limitations on enjoying life seem overwhelming to me.

If you feel overwhelmed maybe you're starting in the wrong place? Telling a person who has never done any exercise to do 30 pull ups is going to overwhelm them, they likely can't even do 1. But they can probably do 10 wall push ups pretty easily.

But really it depends. If the person doesn't even want to do push ups off the wall because they see it as incongruous with what they really want to be doing then they aren't even going to have the motivation to do that.

I guess it depends what is overwhelming you, and why?

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

As Christians, we are called to bear our cross, but the numerous self-imposed limitations on enjoying life seem overwhelming to me.

What the world sees as restrictive about Christianity, we, as Christians, should see as liberating. What the world sees as liberating, we should see as restrictive. To the world, the Lordship of Christ is restrictive, but to me, the Lordship of Christ is liberating. See these passages:

Psalm 2:1 Why do the nations rage And the peoples meditate on a vain thing? 2 The kings of the earth take their stand And the rulers take counsel together Against Yahweh and against His Christ, saying, 3 “Let us tear their fetters apart And cast away their cords from us!”

John 8:34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. 35And the slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever. 36So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.

George Orwell once said, "The more I hear people chant about their freedom and how free they are, the more I hear their chains rattling." These are very true words.

The world loves its freedom to sin. It loves its freedom to destroy itself. All of these things that the world sees as blessings are actually curses. The world does not realize that it's actually in slavery to sin. It is infinitely better to be a slave of Christ than a slave of sin. Slavery to Christ is what true freedom is. If we are in Christ, we are free from the guilt and penalty of sin, and will one day be free from its presence altogether.

I asked my priest if it was permissible to engage in activities like womanizing, drinking, and gambling while also performing good deeds like giving alms to balance it out.

The idea of giving alms to atone for our own sins is not Biblical. Christ is the one who atones, and if we are in Him, His Law restricts us from sin, but His Grace frees us to live in Him. No amount of womanizing is better than a God-blessed marriage, just ask Roosh what his womanizing got him. No amount of drinking is better than receiving the Eucharist, knowing that the Lord died to save you. No amount of gambling is better than knowing that whatever God's Word says is a sure thing. All of these things destroy the lives of those who practice them, and if that were not enough, they lead to Hell.

When I previously posted, I expressed my disappointment with Christianity's numerous self-restrictive rules, which seem to put us at a disadvantage compared to those who don't adhere to Christian teachings.

It's the other way around. The world's unlimited pursuit of sin puts it at a disadvantage.

Yes, following Christ requires self-denial, but we are ordinary people living in the world, not saints residing in heaven or monasteries. I still want to succeed in life before I die.

This is why legalism is deadly to the Christian faith. It fundamentally misses the point of the Gospel. When other Christians try to bind my conscience with their self-righteous obligations, I look to Christ who's given me so much more freedom than that. However, that principle does not carry when it comes to sin. As we grow in the Lord, He teaches us to hate our sin. This is my hope, not only for you, but for all of us. That we become convinced of our sinfulness and that we place our trust in God, not ourselves, to change our hearts as we make war with the flesh.

 

[Samseau]

I asked my priest if it was permissible to engage in activities like womanizing, drinking, and gambling while also performing good deeds like giving alms to balance it out. However, we will be judged equally for our sins.

Having a girlfriend, a beer or two on the weekends, and maybe playing some blackjack or poker once or twice a year with small amounts of cash aren't going to send you (or anyone) to hell.

The risk with all of these things is that they are addictive, and once someone becomes addicted then it can easily send them to hell. That's why the common advice to stay away from these sins altogether, to avoid temptation in the first place.

However all of us are attracted to the forbidden fruit, just as Adam was, and all of us will sin a bit here or there. Thus it is vitally important to keep a strong relationship with Christ, to prevent ourselves from being sucked into the sin completely. Christ bears our sins but only if we let Him - put your trust in Him, pray to Him, and keep faith in Him. In this way can a person navigate the temptations of life, and enjoy a drink on the weekends, without risking becoming an alcoholic, for example.

 

[analyst_green]

Having a girlfriend, a beer or two on the weekends, and maybe playing some blackjack or poker once or twice a year with small amounts of cash aren't going to send you (or anyone) to hell.

I would not put these activities in the same category. Drinking alcohol is plainly not a sin unless you abuse it. Gambling with a few level-headed friends is arguably not a sin either (whereas gambling at a casino that profits from peoples' addictions is).

However, having a girlfriend, by which I understand a woman you have sexual relations with that you are not married to, is certainly a sin. It is fornication, one of those specific sins mentioned by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 6 that could compromise your salvation. Roosh knows this, hence why he gave up fornication entirely though I understand it was incredibly difficult for him.

"9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."

I believe God is very forgiving with the sins of lust because they're so pervasive. But if someone willfully disobeys and through premeditation begins a long-term relationship with a woman, what does that do to his soul?

 

[easy_c]

I've got a recommendation question.

Does anyone know of a good priest who is both fairly accessible and who is knowledgeable about the mystic and esoteric?

I have a question specifically for such an individual that my intuition warns me must revealed very selectively.

 

[Josephus]

I would not put these activities in the same category. Drinking alcohol is plainly not a sin unless you abuse it. Gambling with a few level-headed friends is arguably not a sin either (whereas gambling at a casino that profits from peoples' addictions is).

However, having a girlfriend, by which I understand a woman you have sexual relations with that you are not married to, is certainly a sin. It is fornication, one of those specific sins mentioned by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 6 that could compromise your salvation. Roosh knows this, hence why he gave up fornication entirely though I understand it was incredibly difficult for him.

"9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."

I believe God is very forgiving with the sins of lust because they're so pervasive. But if someone willfully disobeys and through premeditation begins a long-term relationship with a woman, what does that do to his soul?

I believe your analysis is completely correct from a theological point of view. However, from a practical viewpoint it is incredibly difficult. I would estimate from my upbringing in Catholicism that less than 20% of couples followed the churches rules of no sexual activities before marriage. My guess is the percentage is nearly nonexistent today. The percentage was higher when people married younger, then it drops off dramatically.

Now of course this is just a ballpark figure and I don’t know the ins and outs of people’s lives. This is an estimate of growing up in a highly Catholic culture and speaking with friends. These issues are usually taboo to bring up because of the purity culture in the church. But past say 20, virgins are extremely rare.

I don’t know the numbers for Orthodox.

Now, the other point I’d like to make is that there is great freedom in discipline and self denial. If a man is able to truly overcome his lust and control it (it will never completely go away) his mind and body are truly free. Imagine what you could accomplish if that energy is transferred.

The paradoxical thing is when we act oppositely of what the material world tells us, we are more happy. Living simply instead of lavish possessions, taming the passions, instead of giving in, fasting, hard exercise.

The ability to tame lust is probably the in the same category.

 

[analyst_green]

I believe your analysis is completely correct from a theological point of view. However, from a practical viewpoint it is incredibly difficult. I would estimate from my upbringing in Catholicism that less than 20% of couples followed the churches rules of no sexual activities before marriage. My guess is the percentage is nearly nonexistent today. The percentage was higher when people married younger, then it drops off dramatically.

Now of course this is just a ballpark figure and I don’t know the ins and outs of people’s lives. This is an estimate of growing up in a highly Catholic culture and speaking with friends. These issues are usually taboo to bring up because of the purity culture in the church. But past say 20, virgins are extremely rare.

I don’t know the numbers for Orthodox.

Now, the other point I’d like to make is that there is great freedom in discipline and self denial. If a man is able to truly overcome his lust and control it (it will never completely go away) his mind and body are truly free. Imagine what you could accomplish if that energy is transferred.

The paradoxical thing is when we act oppositely of what the material world tells us, we are more happy. Living simply instead of lavish possessions, taming the passions, instead of giving in, fasting, hard exercise.

The ability to tame lust is probably the in the same category.

Yes it is incredibly difficult and very rare in this day and age that someone follows God's commandments concerning chastity entirely. That doesn't mean we give up though. We strive to lead lives free of sin even though complete freedom from sin is impossible.

In your case of a Christian couple that is planning on getting married, but out of weakness has sexual relations before marriage, it would be a lesser sin than the deliberate trespass of God's commandments. At least they are sticking to one lifelong sexual partner as Christ intended. But if a Christian man were to have a secular girlfriend with no plans of getting married, that is the greater sin. Though even that still harms your soul less than what the PUAs are doing, or the sodomites. If we must choose between two sins, we always choose the lesser. But with God's help we have to believe it is possible we do neither.

 

[Rodion]

Yes it is incredibly difficult and very rare in this day and age that someone follows God's commandments concerning chastity entirely. That doesn't mean we give up though. We strive to lead lives free of sin even though complete freedom from sin is impossible.

In your case of a Christian couple that is planning on getting married, but out of weakness has sexual relations before marriage, it would be a lesser sin than the deliberate trespass of God's commandments. At least they are sticking to one lifelong sexual partner as Christ intended. But if a Christian man were to have a secular girlfriend with no plans of getting married, that is the greater sin. Though even that still harms your soul less than what the PUAs are doing, or the sodomites. If we must choose between two sins, we always choose the lesser. But with God's help we have to believe it is possible we do neither.

I actually spoke to a monk on Athos who told me that you have to believe that it is possible to become dispassionate, and to look at women without being moved, and if you do not believe this is possible then you should bring it to confession.

But yes, being a baptised Orthodox Christian and then dating and having sexual relations with a secular or non-orthodox woman would be spiritually catastrophic I think. Such a thing used to result in years away from the chalice