Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Reed

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: March 25, 2005, 10:05:44 AM »
Matushka, thank you for the post concerning the Molokan and the Old Believers.  I have an older friend whose family was part of the Molokan church here in the US.  She was never specific on their beliefs.  Their churches are mainly centered in California, so she worshipped with our congregation.  Thanks again.

2
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: March 23, 2005, 02:56:26 PM »
Thank you to both Georgiy and matushka for the information on the old believers.  Interesting that the molokans are so unknown.  

He Is Risen...(on Sunday)!!!

3
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: March 22, 2005, 04:58:28 PM »
Georgiy,

What is the difference between the old believers, molokans, and orthodox?  I know that can be complicated.   Any help appreciated.

4
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 08, 2005, 05:31:25 PM »
Thanks Georgiy for explaining and it makes perfect sense without the diagram.  I often wondered the significance.

5
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 07, 2005, 10:28:42 AM »
Just got back and couldn't resist the Inferno test.....I made to purgatory......unfortunately..I don't believe in purgatory!!!!! :-[

6
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 02, 2005, 03:19:20 PM »
Quote
Yes, this is true, Reed, but what about human sacrifice? Wouldn't that be considered murder and yet in some cultures it wasn't, it was a good thing. Even in the old testament, Abraham was willing to do it when "God" asked him to. It was attempted murder to be exact, to our modern eyes  ;). And yet, it was ultimately presented as a good thing because it was for the loyalty of God. Again, I still think that even things that should be "black and white" universally, often aren't....


Yes, Helen you are correct.  Cultures such as the Aztecs, Incas, etc.  did pratice human sacrific and it was accepted within their "religious system."  The Old Testament is also a good example.  One wonders if God would have allowed Abraham to actually kill Isaac??  It does center more on obedience than the actual act.  Later God condemned those cultures that did sacrifice humans...the Philistines for one.  I do think that deep within all humans there is a good part (spiritual)trying to overcome the bad part (evil).  In my belief system before the entrance of evil into the world all men/women were good and we have a inherent need to go back to that place.  Through the years this has been wrapped in "religion."  Anytime we try to explain God we fail sometimes because we have preconceived ideas taught by "religious systems."  But somewhere down deep is the need for a higher purpose, meaning......God.  I hope that makes some sense.

7
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 02, 2005, 11:09:39 AM »
Quote


And yeah, if you want to sleep with your neighbour's wife etc. do as you please...but whether or not you consider there to be a God...what about your neighbour - how will he feel/how would you if it were your wife? You'll make a very unhappy life for yourself & others if you only go through it thinking of what you want (IMO)  ;)



Excellent point bluetoria!!

8
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 01, 2005, 05:22:55 PM »
Quote

Not really, it could also be cultural... It could be inherent...


Helen, I understand what you are saying about culture.....a word might be "mores" .....but there does seem to be those "limits" or "evils" or "sins" that are inherent in all cultures, peoples.  One might be murder.

9
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 01, 2005, 05:14:19 PM »
Quote

What is evil? And what is right and wrong? Right for whom? Wrong for whom? Most of it is so subjective, depending on whom you talk to....


Would this be more in line with situational ethics??  

10
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 01, 2005, 05:05:57 PM »
Webster's definition of sin:

1.  an offense esp. against God
2.  fault
3.  a weakened state of human nature in which the self is estranged from God

11
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: February 01, 2005, 10:01:24 AM »
http://www.ehistory.com/world/articles/ArticleView.cfm?AID=9

This is a site that discusses the destruction of the library in Alexandra.

12
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: January 26, 2005, 05:24:52 PM »
Dashkova,

I apologize for seeming "patronizing and condescending"  I didn't intend it to be so.  Thank you for posting the picture, I had sent it to the FA for posting.  


13
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: January 26, 2005, 04:30:32 PM »
Dashkova,
I really think we are on the same page as far as the influences of art through the centuries.  I don't think I'm expressing my meaning clearly.  We were discussing the "gore" factor and an example of an altar piece was given.  What I'm trying to say is that those day to day events that are happening in the culture often times find themselves being expressed in the art.  For example during the terrible plagues of Europe, we see death, bodies, evil as a major theme in the art of the time.  That is what I'm meaning when I say the culture influences the art.  I hope that helps.....it's much easier to express it orally than by written methods.  

I didn't say that the spiritual motivations used by the church was appropriate (I believe not!).....but they were effective with an uneducated populace.

The Dura Europas church is an excellent example of the synthesis of beliefs among the common people.  The influence of paganism and Judaism on Christianity cannot be discounted.  

I'm amused by your differentiation between religious and non-religious institutions.  It comes across as a put down to someone who might have gotten their education from a religiously associated school.  So....say if I attended Notre Dame.....my education is somehow suspect.  It is a "religious school."  Actually I have studied religion (most of them).  As to my pedigree in education, suffice it to say I have studied at both types of institutions and have enough degrees to register on the scale.   I totally disagree with the idea that faith and academics cannot agree......on with the discussion!!!   ;D

14
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: January 26, 2005, 03:48:54 PM »


"On the Palatine, chief of Rome's seven hills, this anti-Christian graffito was found scratched inot a wall.  The figure on the cross has the head of an ass; the caption reads, 'Alexameons worships his god.'  The crude drawing, from the early 200's, is the earliest known representation of the crucifixion of Jesus."

Christian History, Issue 27 (Vol.IX, No. 3)

I'm not sure I'm doing this correctly....forgive me FA if I'm not.  

15
Imperial Russian History / Re: discussion about orthodox religion
« on: January 26, 2005, 03:24:06 PM »
I found the reference and I stand corrected.  This is the caption with the picture....which once I figure out how to post pictures,I will do it.

"On the Palatine, chief of Rome's seven hills, this anti-Christian grafitto was found scratched into a wall.  The giure on the cross has the head of an ass; the caption reads, 'Alexamenos worships his god.'  The crude drawing, from the early 200's is the earliest known representation of the crucifixion of Jesus."

Earliest known of the crucifixion...but other symbols were used prior to that date.  

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8