Premarital Sex Is Not a Sin?

[dzheremi]

that was really uninteresting by the end. to be honest.

Noted. Learning about the Orthodox mindset is boring. No wonder you're such a smash hit around here.

he did, very briefly, touch on premarital sex

Ive done a lot of retreats [...]teaching [...] "don't sleep with your girl friend" [...]

however, despite stating his views, he does not explain them. so is really no better that if any of you just said "don't have premarital sex" without giving an explanation.

I think you may have missed the point of that part of the podcast. The point is that it is really less about empty (content-less) moralizing, and more about what it means to be a child of God. As I am sure you would agree, Fr. Jacobse believes that it is not enough to simply tell young people "don't have sex with your girlfriend" (as he states, "they've heard it so much they don't hear it anymore"), but that to show them why you must show them what they're meant to be - how they're meant to live. Forgive me, but it seems from everything you've written in this thread that you have no idea what that is. By reducing the Bible (or any aspect of Christianity) to a simple code of behavior ("do this, don't do this"), you end up missing the bigger picture of who we are meant to be. I'm pretty sure that was in the podcast, too, and it's a real shame you missed it.

there was one quote that really stood out for me:

the truth is self verifying. what I mean by that is: the truth is true, not because it conforms to some model of what the truth should be.
the truth is true, because it comes from him that is true. who is Jesus Christ.

the was I read this is:
the truth is true, not because it conforms to some model given out by the church.
the truth is true, because it comes from him that is true. who is Jesus Christ. as written in the bible.

I don't disagree with that, in that what is written about Jesus Christ in the Bible is true, but I think that's a pretty self-serving manipulation of the quote given the context in which you are using the Bible to justify your wrong decision-making. Also, Fr. Jacobse did not say "as written in the Bible".

OK, so this does seem a little bias of an interpretation.

I'd say that adding something to the quote that wasn't originally there purely to support your position is more than just a little biased. You must come from the Martin Luther school of Biblical interpretation.

 

[PeterTheAleut]

do I believe God exists. yes
do I believe Jesus existed. yes
do I believe the holy spirit exists. yes. although I am a little unsure on its nature.
do I believe the the three are all just different facets of the same being, ie God. no
Jesus has shown his independence to god several times. if he and God where truly one and the same then doing things like preforming his first miracle even thou his "time has not yet come", such things just would not occur.

You seem to think we hold to some modalist view of God. Why would we do this if we have condemned modalism as a heresy? We don't believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all just different facets of God. We believe that the three distinct persons of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God. BTW, we believe that Jesus IS the Son and that Jesus still lives today.

 

[FountainPen]

I just find it a bit difficult to believe that the Greeks who have gone before us for centuries all somehow misunderstood what the word porneia meant at the time of the writing of the new testament and some blonde and blue eyed scholars born in the last five minutes are able to somehow divine its true meaning.

Are you familiar with the "apostolic fathers"? They are the early church leaders who wrote immediately following the writing of the new testament. Many of them knew the apostles personally.

This coud have been easily said to Jesus by the learned Hebrew scholars when he confronted them at 12 explaining the torah and indeed later as an adult. An equally young  (though not blonde and blue eyed -- what that has to do with anything idk), who had only been born in the last minute comparatively.

Do the Gentile early Christians have more weight than the Jewish born early Christians when it comes to understanding of the scriptures?

 

[Melodist]

I just find it a bit difficult to believe that the Greeks who have gone before us for centuries all somehow misunderstood what the word porneia meant at the time of the writing of the new testament and some blonde and blue eyed scholars born in the last five minutes are able to somehow divine its true meaning.

Are you familiar with the "apostolic fathers"? They are the early church leaders who wrote immediately following the writing of the new testament. Many of them knew the apostles personally.

This coud have been easily said to Jesus by the learned Hebrew scholars when he confronted them at 12 explaining the torah and indeed later as an adult. An equally young  (though not blonde and blue eyed -- what that has to do with anything idk), who had only been born in the last minute comparatively.

Do the Gentile early Christians have more weight than the Jewish born early Christians when it comes to understanding of the scriptures?

Was Jesus ever corrected for having a misunderstanding of human sexuality and it's place in marriage?

 

[akimori makoto]

I just find it a bit difficult to believe that the Greeks who have gone before us for centuries all somehow misunderstood what the word porneia meant at the time of the writing of the new testament and some blonde and blue eyed scholars born in the last five minutes are able to somehow divine its true meaning.

Are you familiar with the "apostolic fathers"? They are the early church leaders who wrote immediately following the writing of the new testament. Many of them knew the apostles personally.

This coud have been easily said to Jesus by the learned Hebrew scholars when he confronted them at 12 explaining the torah and indeed later as an adult. An equally young  (though not blonde and blue eyed -- what that has to do with anything idk), who had only been born in the last minute comparatively.

Do the Gentile early Christians have more weight than the Jewish born early Christians when it comes to understanding of the scriptures?

I think you have a good global point here, but I only meant for my "argument" (it is more of a feeling) to be applied to matters of pure linguistics.

My presumption (rebuttable on strong enough evidence) is that those of a Greek-speaking patrimony more properly understand the meaning of particular Greek words used in the new testament, especially where their interpretation is witnessed to by centuries of conformity across many places. So, my starting point is that the pre-Nicene and later fathers probably well-understood what the apostles meant by the word "porneia" when they wrote it.

Re my blonde and blue-eyed comment: we Greeks/Romans/Hellenes/Byzantines/&c. tire of being told how wrong our pronunciation of our own language is, how little our language resembles that of the ancients, how we aren't even really Greeks/Romans/Hellenes/Byzantines/&c. because our skin is too dark and our eyebrows too fuzzy. I will confess I have a bias against anglophone and continental scholars who think they have arrived at a superior, purer understanding of the ancients and the apostles than that of our God-bearing fathers.

 

[akimori makoto]

akimori makoto: I am not an expert on such matters, I just find it a bit difficult to believe that the Greeks who have gone before us for centuries all somehow misunderstood what the word porneia meant at the time of the writing of the new testament. and some blonde and blue eyed scholars born in the last five minutes are able to somehow divine its true meaning.

Artificial: This originally meant ‘full of artistic or technical skill’. Now its meaning has a very different slant.
Manufacture: From the Latin meaning ‘to make by hand’ this originally signified things that were created by craftsmen. Now the opposite, made by machines, is its meaning.
Awful: This meant ‘full of awe’ i.e. something wonderful, delightful, amazing. However, over time it has evolved to mean exactly the opposite.
I'm sure your intelligent enough to see where my rebuttal is going.

[/quote]

I do, indeed, see where you are going with this, and I generally think you have a point. You will find, however, that all the evidence points to the fact that the earliest Christians who wrote anything down understood "porneia" to include extra-marital sex.

Now, I agree that this particular facet of Christian morality is quite burdensome in the modern age, given the unnatural delay of marriage which has become the norm. I do not believe, however, that the proper remedy is to reinterpret the Scriptures in a way that is totally unfaithful to their authors and those who learnt the faith from them.

 

[Cavaradossi]

akimori makoto: I am not an expert on such matters, I just find it a bit difficult to believe that the Greeks who have gone before us for centuries all somehow misunderstood what the word porneia meant at the time of the writing of the new testament. and some blonde and blue eyed scholars born in the last five minutes are able to somehow divine its true meaning.

Artificial: This originally meant ‘full of artistic or technical skill’. Now its meaning has a very different slant.
Manufacture: From the Latin meaning ‘to make by hand’ this originally signified things that were created by craftsmen. Now the opposite, made by machines, is its meaning.
Awful: This meant ‘full of awe’ i.e. something wonderful, delightful, amazing. However, over time it has evolved to mean exactly the opposite.
I'm sure your intelligent enough to see where my rebuttal is going.

Yes, so then the Greek speakers were too stupid and simple to realize that words might change in meaning over the centuries? Any English speaker worth his salt would know that the three examples you provided originally meant something else because of other words with similar stems but divergent meanings. For example, with artificial, we have the word artifice, which preserves the original association with artistry and cleverness. Similarly, we have an entire host of words related to manufacture, the best example probably being manual, which means simply, "done with the hands." For awful, we have the word awesome, which has retained the original association with the word awe that the word awful in modern English parlance has lost. I think that to assume that the Greek speaking world has, for over a millennium, been too benighted to figure out whether porneia had undergone some sort of semantic change since the time of the Gospels is a rather untenable position.

 

[Virtus_lb]

Old Testament wasn't specifically against premarital sex and had some pretty patriarchal and polygamic laws, but the New Testament is different.

The word "Porneia" means "Sexual Immorality", which Paul clearly calls any sex outside of marriage. It has much wider meaning than fornication though. Christ mostly talked about adultery(cheating spouse), because premarital sex wasn't that common in Jewish society.

Today in Europe, North and South America - very few people follow this commandment, and whoever doesn't follow it, I consider Non-Christians. That was reason I left Christianity myself, because saw most of Christians as false Christians, not only advocating premarital sex, but even mocking the chaste men. I blamed Church for half of it, because it very tolerant in this issue and never publicly condemns it. There are other sins to count, and I am generally Pelagian in thoughts.

 

[FountainPen]

That was reason I left Christianity myself, because saw most of Christians as false Christians,

How is this a legitimate reason to leave Christianity? How do part-time 'christians' invalidate the religion itself?

 

[Virtus_lb]

That was reason I left Christianity myself, because saw most of Christians as false Christians,

How is this a legitimate reason to leave Christianity? How do part-time 'christians' invalidate the religion itself?

Because Church wasn't saying anything against them. They are still proud to have 83% of population Orthodox Christian, when real number is 1-2%... I have never heard an address of the Church about these issues, they tend to live peacefully and just want people to come to church whatever their morality or knowledge may be.

 

[primuspilus]

That was reason I left Christianity myself, because saw most of Christians as false Christians

Just because folks dont take Christ seriously does not mean Christ is a lie.

PP

 

[biro]

[quote author="Virtus_lb"]I blamed Church for half of it, because it very tolerant in this issue and never publicly condemns it. There are other sins to count, and I am generally Pelagian in thoughts.[/quote]

What? You mean to tell me you have never heard a sermon or read an article which condemns premarital sex? I don't believe that. Either you don't attend church, or you went to a very liberal one.

Besides, who are you to 'count' other people's sins? Are you saying you don't sin?

That's impossible.

 

[primuspilus]

In the end, we're all hypocrites.

PP

 

[dzheremi]

Hmm. I'm not seeing the logic in giving up on Christianity because of bad Christians. When we're disappointed in a meal, do we stop eating forever?

 

[Virtus_lb]

[quote author="Virtus_lb"]I blamed Church for half of it, because it very tolerant in this issue and never publicly condemns it. There are other sins to count, and I am generally Pelagian in thoughts.

What? You mean to tell me you have never heard a sermon or read an article which condemns premarital sex? I don't believe that. Either you don't attend church, or you went to a very liberal one.

Besides, who are you to 'count' other people's sins? Are you saying you don't sin?

That's impossible.
[/quote]

Well, in my country lot of Orthodox have criticized me for condemning sex before marriage. So even if I assume that most of falsely self-proclaimed(which are like 95% at least) Orthodox in my country don't visit church and never hear from a preacher --- I have never heard from a priest talking about premarital sex in regards to men.

The whole society agrees that men should be pretty skilled in sex at the time of marriage and they are considered weak or fools if they aren't. The Church still continues to preach about chastity of women only for some reason, because this appeals to our patriarchal society well as we have institute of virginity as way to monopolize women, while men can go to whores or to other countries for having fun.

I am not discrediting our whole Church, we have been Christians since IV century and there have been and still are some righteous and true Christian Theologians/priests in our country. I just talk about general situation.


P.S. I am not sinless, but could become if I was Christian. At least I don't say bad words, I don't fornicate, kill, murder or do harm to anyone even when I am a non-believer. So it should be easier for a believer...

 

[IsmiLiora]

P.S. I am not sinless, but could become if I was Christian. At least I don't say bad words, I don't fornicate, kill, murder or do harm to anyone even when I am a non-believer. So it should be easier for a believer...

HAHAHA! I wish!


Call any of us when you do not feel anger, greed, pride, or lust. Or call me and tell me what your secret is.

 

[primuspilus]

[quote author="Virtus_lb"]I blamed Church for half of it, because it very tolerant in this issue and never publicly condemns it. There are other sins to count, and I am generally Pelagian in thoughts.

P.S. I am not sinless, but could become if I was Christian. At least I don't say bad words, I don't fornicate, kill, murder or do harm to anyone even when I am a non-believer. So it should be easier for a believer...

Not trying to make light, but as a non-believer, the Devil doesn't care a wit about you not sinning

I would make the same argument about alot of folks that are "born" into a belief system. They (I use the term lightly) are by default what folks choose to be. I've seen it in Orthodoxy, RC's, Protestants, Muslims, everyone. Those born into a belief system really have not had that "eureka!" moment where converts have. vSo they kind of just "tread water" if you will.

Of course my generalizations are not completely accurate (as most aren't  ) but I hope it helps.


PP

 

[Virtus_lb]

P.S. I am not sinless, but could become if I was Christian. At least I don't say bad words, I don't fornicate, kill, murder or do harm to anyone even when I am a non-believer. So it should be easier for a believer...

HAHAHA! I wish!


Call any of us when you do not feel anger, greed, pride, or lust. Or call me and tell me what your secret is.

Well, I don't say I never experience these, but as I said - for a believer it's much easier. Or else, he/she isn't a believer.

Recently I was arguing with Protestants(they are fascinated by my biblical knowledge and reasoning by the way) about "Only Faith", and as far as I am kind of Pelagian, I "tricked" them and in the end I got them agree on: "We are saved by faith alone, but if we have no works or if we continue to sin - this means we have no faith".

For me, I consider sexual desire to be toughest to deal with. Anger and Greed are mostly alien to me... And there is no secret here... Pride - this depends...

 

[Virtus_lb]

Not trying to make light, but as a non-believer, the Devil doesn't care a wit about you not sinning

I would make the same argument about alot of folks that are "born" into a belief system. They (I use the term lightly) are by default what folks choose to be. I've seen it in Orthodoxy, RC's, Protestants, Muslims, everyone. Those born into a belief system really have not had that "eureka!" moment where converts have. vSo they kind of just "tread water" if you will.

Of course my generalizations are not completely accurate (as most aren't  ) but I hope it helps.


PP

You are right, that's why I sometimes consider baptism of children(even though it's not wrong) leading Christians in wrong way. When 83% of country's population are Christians, and only 2%(maximum) exhibit Christian reasoning, then something's wrong... And tree is judged by its fruits you know...

 

[primuspilus]

Not trying to make light, but as a non-believer, the Devil doesn't care a wit about you not sinning

I would make the same argument about alot of folks that are "born" into a belief system. They (I use the term lightly) are by default what folks choose to be. I've seen it in Orthodoxy, RC's, Protestants, Muslims, everyone. Those born into a belief system really have not had that "eureka!" moment where converts have. vSo they kind of just "tread water" if you will.

Of course my generalizations are not completely accurate (as most aren't  ) but I hope it helps.


PP

You are right, that's why I sometimes consider baptism of children(even though it's not wrong) leading Christians in wrong way. When 83% of country's population are Christians, and only 2%(maximum) exhibit Christian reasoning, then something's wrong... And tree is judged by its fruits you know...

Although I wont say the baptism of children is wrong, as I personally believe in it I will say that I agree that it can lead into the wrong way if not taken with the right heart attitude later on in life. I think it is a shame where there are so many Christians where you are (and in many other places) that can have the word "nominal" in front of it.....what a shame. Lord have mercy.


PP

 

[HabteSelassie]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

You are right, that's why I sometimes consider baptism of children(even though it's not wrong) leading Christians in wrong way. When 83% of country's population are Christians, and only 2%(maximum) exhibit Christian reasoning, then something's wrong... And tree is judged by its fruits you know...

This is not exactly an Orthodox ontology.  We in Orthodox are not "born-again" and our Mystery of Baptism is not a symbol or reflection of cognisant conversion or sincere repentance, Baptism is from God.  Baptism is a mystical conversion of the heart and soul, killing and burying the old man of Sin and entering the neophyte into a new life in Christ, even as a young infant.  We do not choose God here, God has chosen us.  The Baptism does all the work, we do nothing but receive it.  So if we Baptize later it will make NO DIFFERENCE, the Baptism is Grace, and Grace is not given by measure or agency.  Older people do not receive more Grace than younger.  The Church MUST give Baptism to those, even infants, to prepare the life in the Church spiritually, by the Holy Spirit.  The Baptism does all the work.  If a person is 10 months old, 10 years old, or 100 years old, there is no difference.  The "born-again" concepts of Baptism from Evangelicals fit more-so into the Orthodox Tradition of Confession/Repentance.  If we find our communities or societies in an Orthodox decline, we do not need to change Orthodox, we need to change ourselves.  Further, its not a matter of force of will, it must be of the Grace of God, so we must turn to prayer for these matters, deeply.  The more we need change, the more deeply we need to pray and let God go before us doing His might works.

stay blessed,
habte selassie

 

[IsmiLiora]

P.S. I am not sinless, but could become if I was Christian. At least I don't say bad words, I don't fornicate, kill, murder or do harm to anyone even when I am a non-believer. So it should be easier for a believer...

HAHAHA! I wish!


Call any of us when you do not feel anger, greed, pride, or lust. Or call me and tell me what your secret is.

Well, I don't say I never experience these, but as I said - for a believer it's much easier. Or else, he/she isn't a believer.

For me, I consider sexual desire to be toughest to deal with. Anger and Greed are mostly alien to me... And there is no secret here... Pride - this depends...

No offense my brother, but I am extremely skeptical when I find people who can identify sins that they don't struggle with at all. I've listed them and used them when I criticized my loved ones for struggling with them. Guess what? I got mine. It was pride the entire time. And now I am unluckily burdened with my other vices as well.

If you breathe, you are prideful in some way. Nuff said.

It is easier for a believer in the sense that we have prayer, we have the saints and can ask them to help us intercede, we can talk to God, we can fast, etc. etc. But perhaps it takes many many years to even think it's easier to get by each day without sinning, whether in thought or deed.

 

[Virtus_lb]

P.S. I am not sinless, but could become if I was Christian. At least I don't say bad words, I don't fornicate, kill, murder or do harm to anyone even when I am a non-believer. So it should be easier for a believer...

HAHAHA! I wish!


Call any of us when you do not feel anger, greed, pride, or lust. Or call me and tell me what your secret is.

Well, I don't say I never experience these, but as I said - for a believer it's much easier. Or else, he/she isn't a believer.

For me, I consider sexual desire to be toughest to deal with. Anger and Greed are mostly alien to me... And there is no secret here... Pride - this depends...

No offense my brother, but I am extremely skeptical when I find people who can identify sins that they don't struggle with at all. I've listed them and used them when I criticized my loved ones for struggling with them. Guess what? I got mine. It was pride the entire time. And now I am unluckily burdened with my other vices as well.

If you breathe, you are prideful in some way. Nuff said.

It is easier for a believer in the sense that we have prayer, we have the saints and can ask them to help us intercede, we can talk to God, we can fast, etc. etc. But perhaps it takes many many years to even think it's easier to get by each day without sinning, whether in thought or deed.

What you mean in "struggle with sins" - do you want to kill or steal so much that you are struggling with those? I understand the thought may arise, you can do nothing about it, but main thing is - you shouldn't have intention or motivation to do it. And it's common sense for any normal person to love others, and if you love others, you don't feel anger, hate, greed and etc.

"If you breathe, you are prideful in some way." - this statement is alien to the scriptures I would say, not to mention logic.

Then why Apostle John writes: "Don't be fooled! Whoever sins, is not from God." and later: "Whoever is born of God, does not sin, because Son of God protects him". And I thought people were born of God at the time of baptism. [Check last 3 chapters of John's I epistle]

And why Apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 5: "I told you not to mix with adulterers... And any other sinners(he lists some types of sinners)... I told you not to even eat with them..."

 

[IsmiLiora]

1 John 3:15: Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

If we want to take the murder definition to that point, yes, I struggle with it. Same with adultery.

I know it is not quite the same as murdering, but I believe that sin stems from a single thought, and as long as I have those thoughts there often, my chances to sin are definitely increased.

 

[vamrat]

1 John 3:15: Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

If we want to take the murder definition to that point, yes, I struggle with it. Same with adultery.

I know it is not quite the same as murdering, but I believe that sin stems from a single thought, and as long as I have those thoughts there often, my chances to sin are definitely increased.

Brings to mind one of my favorite Warhammer 40k quotes - Thought begets heresy.  Heresy begets retribution. 

Seems like that works pretty well in the spiritual life as well.

 

[FountainPen]

I understand the thought may arise, you can do nothing about it, but main thing is - you shouldn't have intention or motivation to do it. And it's common sense for any normal person to love others, and if you love others, you don't feel anger, hate, greed and etc.

You can do a lot about it. If you keep your thoughts in check, then the negative ones come up less and less often. I agree with you that you shouldn't have intention or motivation to act on those thoughts but i must disagree that in loving others you don't feel negative emotions /laughs. You just don't act on them, or try not to.

 

[orthonorm]

1 John 3:15: Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

If we want to take the murder definition to that point, yes, I struggle with it. Same with adultery.

I know it is not quite the same as murdering, but I believe that sin stems from a single thought, and as long as I have those thoughts there often, my chances to sin are definitely increased.

Nice avatar change! Much more inline with the season.

 

[orthonorm]

1 John 3:15: Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

If we want to take the murder definition to that point, yes, I struggle with it. Same with adultery.

I know it is not quite the same as murdering, but I believe that sin stems from a single thought, and as long as I have those thoughts there often, my chances to sin are definitely increased.

Brings to mind one of my favorite Warhammer 40k quotes - Thought begets heresy.  Heresy begets retribution. 

Seems like that works pretty well in the spiritual life as well.

Awesome. Preaching to the hipsters is so 2008, you gotta cull that stuff for the nerd set and get them to Orthodoxy toot sweet!

 

[IsmiLiora]

1 John 3:15: Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

If we want to take the murder definition to that point, yes, I struggle with it. Same with adultery.

I know it is not quite the same as murdering, but I believe that sin stems from a single thought, and as long as I have those thoughts there often, my chances to sin are definitely increased.

Nice avatar change! Much more inline with the season.

I love how you quote my posts to respond to my avatars.

You're welcome.

And Vamrat, nice Warhammer quote. And I've played it, although I never read the books, so I'll have to quote it to my friend next time I see him, just to see if he recognizes it...

 

[Virtus_lb]

Ok since IsmiLiora's saying got so popular, I will write an answer to it.

First of all, does that mean hating a good brother or bad brother? I doubt someone can hate a good brother, or else he/she is wicked or mentally ill... If someone is bad, can he be called our brother at all? Paul asked us: "not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is" a sinner(wicked too)...

So he just falsely calls himself a brother while in reality he isn't...

But Christ asked us to love our enemies, not to mention the neutral people. And James says: "With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness." And he spends several sentences proving that it's extremely wrong.

Thus, I am asking you, when the church councils cursed the heretics, isn't it against what Christ and Apostle James told us?

But no, you say, that they deserve it, they deserve being cursed so devastatingly, that they have no chance of salvation. It seems there is no point in last judgment, we have judged and condemned everyone already.

Now with all this, tell me, what is meant in "to hate his brother"? Can you curse(for eternal damnation) someone and still love him?

 

[NicholasMyra]

Now with all this, tell me, what is meant in "to hate his brother"? Can you curse(for eternal damnation) someone and still love him?

Anathema does not mean eternally damned, despite what NIV translators and LARPers would have you believe.

 

[NicholasMyra]

Thus, I am asking you, when the church councils cursed the heretics, isn't it against what Christ and Apostle James told us?

When Christ and the apostle John called people broods of vipers and antichrists, respectively, were they defying the true path?

 

[Virtus_lb]

You(IsmiLiora) ask what is secret, but I ask you - what is love?

Isn't it unconditional passion towards others? As Apostle writes: "love doesn't keep records of bad"; Is it something that is hard? Doesn't St. Gregory the Theologian write in his letter to Theodore:

"We think it an important matter to obtain penalties from those who have wronged us:  an important matter, I say, (for even this is sometimes useful for the correction of others)—but it is far greater and more Godlike, to bear with injuries.  For the former course curbs wickedness, but the latter makes men good, which is much better and more perfect than merely being not wicked."

But is it hard for a believer? Jesus said: "Rejoice, because great is your reward in heaven". But no, lot of people want pleasure on earth too, they want revenge, they sue their wrongdoers in court - it's their right as they say. Those are ones with little faith.

To be demanding, is not love, it's hate, it's fear, but not love. You should be happy because someone else is happy, that's all that makes you happy if you love him/her. And as Paul writes: "It doesn't ask anything in return" - because if you do, then it's a bargain, it's trade and not emission of love like a light, which lights everything on its way, like a rain, "which is sent to all, righteous and unrighteous".

So, if you love, then all your bad thoughts will disappear. Greed, Anger, Hate and etc.

 

[Virtus_lb]

Now with all this, tell me, what is meant in "to hate his brother"? Can you curse(for eternal damnation) someone and still love him?

Anathema does not mean eternally damned, despite what NIV translators and LARPers would have you believe.

This is what modern Church believes in general. St. John Crysostom criticized anathemizing of heretics, but no one listened to him. Well, his best friend got cursed(with terrible words) 125 years later though.

And there was a Georgian Council convened in 11th century, which in the end proclaimed: "Let all Orthodox be glorified and all unorthodox be cursed eternally." - And people are proud of these words.

 

[just_some_guy]

biroP: Then why are you here?

I am here in an attempt to gain understanding on why I should not have premarital sex.
It has been repeated to me several times that followers of the Orthodox Church believe this because the Orthodox Church teaches it. and that they believe the Orthodox Church has not waivered from the original teachings of the apostals, so there for it must be correct.
I have stated that such a narrow minded view is not sufficient to convince me. And that I wish to hear reasons for the Church to teach against Premarital sex.
some responces have addressed reasons for the Churches view; ranging from the moral / ethical stand point to the technical (definition) stand point. and I appreciate them debating on a more logical level.
If, however, you are unable to grasp the concept that "because it is the tradition of the Church" is an argument that is unable to convince me.... then what are you doing here?

Michał Kalina: Almost 2000 years.

Oops, typo.  yes 2000 years

Bible wasn't miraculously discovered in 1950s. It had existed before. Most of the Dead Sea scrolls contain the Old Testament books (of the Bible, not the Protestant crib).

firstly, I know it existed before: hence I said rediscovered.
secondly, I think you misunderstood my question...

akimori makoto: Often, if it is difficult to tell what the apostles meant in the new testament, any ambiguity can be resolved by consulting the apostolic fathers

if the large portions of the Bible where lost for hundereds of years. then how could one use the apostolic fathers to make clear the teachings of the Apostels if you did not even have access the the new testament to begin with?



edit: clicked post by accident. still replying to other comments

 

[Achronos]

quote]if the large portions of the Bible where lost for hundereds of years. then how could one use the apostolic fathers to make clear the teachings of the Apostels if you did not even have access the the new testament to begin with?

Because when reading the Apostolic Fathers do we have a better understanding of the New Testament, because of the tradition that was passed down by the Apostles. Just because there wasn't a NT canon established during the Apostolic Father period until much later in Church history doesn't mean the Fathers weren't aware of what the Apostles were preaching and teaching. So once the 27 books were selected, they must be in line with the tradition that has been passed down.

How else do you think the books were even selected?

 

[just_some_guy]

just_some_guy
that was really uninteresting by the end. to be honest.

Noted. Learning about the Orthodox mindset is boring. No wonder you're such a smash hit around here.

originally it was quite interesting, and I wrote up notes for my responce as I went. by the end the notes went from "quite an interesting listen" to "that was really uninteresting by the end".
didn't actually mean offence, just being honest with you.

The point is that it is really less about empty (content-less) moralizing, and more about what it means to be a child of God.[...] I'm pretty sure that was in the podcast, too, and it's a real shame you missed it.

I didn't miss this quote from the pod cast:

natural law is there, there is no doubt about it. but our Anthropology, Our theology is not grounded in natural law. its grounded in something deeper. its grounded in the awareness the the risen Christ. who he is. we believe that this can be comprehended and known.in one of the monographs we are going to publish in the next three months on gay marrage doctor Vegen Guree touches on this point. he says that natural theology is good, but the Orthodox theology can bring foreward something deeper. and thats how I see that we [Orthodox vs other denominations] differ
can I give you concrete specifics at this point. I really can't, yet. I really can't.because I don't think its been done- frankly. I think we intuit that it needs to be done, but I don't think wev'e engaged this deeper question. exspecially the Anthropological question in any way thats been compelling yet

so even he says the Orthodox Church pulls up short on the Anthropological question.  olice:

PeterTheAleut: We don't believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all just different facets of God. We believe that the three distinct persons of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God

the reason we are discussing the trinity is because you state if I belive in the Trinity then I should also believe in not having premarital sex.
I have stated that I disagree with the Churches point of view about premarital sex, And I have stated that I do not see the 'Trinity' in quite the same way you do.
AND at the same time, even You state the trinity "is contradicted by the majority of the old testament". so why would I see it the way the Orthodox Church sees it?
so, in my opinion, this Trinity facet of the debate is not likely to bear any fruit.

akimori makoto: You will find, however, that all the evidence points to the fact that the earliest Christians who wrote anything down understood "porneia" to include extra-marital sex.

the irony is, the said evidence is what I am after.

I do not believe, however, that the proper remedy is to reinterpret the Scriptures in a way that is totally unfaithful to their authors

in case you didn't realise, from my point of view it is the Church that has reinterpreted the Scriptures. But I do agree with your comment.

Cavaradossi: I think that to assume that the Greek speaking world has, for over a millennium, been too benighted to figure out whether porneia had undergone some sort of semantic change since the time of the Gospels is a rather untenable position.

I did not say the word swoped meaning the way my examples did. I simply mean that, somewhere along the line, premarital sex was added to the list of "sexual immoralitys".
and may I point out that prehaps they have figured out that proneia has undergone semantic change. remember those blonde and blue eyed scholars...?

Melodist: Was Jesus ever corrected for having a misunderstanding of human sexuality and it's place in marriage?

and as far as Im aware, he was never quoted as saying fornication was a sin either.

Virtus_lb: Paul clearly calls any sex outside of marriage

you make a big claim. but can you back it up?  where does Paul say this?

NicholasMyra: Anathema does not mean eternally damned, despite what NIV translators and LARPers would have you believe.

so Porneia is not the only greek word with contested translations ^_^



@ Virtus_lb
you probly don't care much about my point of view, seeing as I fit into the catigory of "false Christians" you descrided. however:
If you believe in 'your view' of Christianity, even if it is different to the 'view' of 95% of the population. Don't give up on it just because of peer pressure to change views. and Definetly don't give up on it because the local Church isn't supporting you the way you think it should.

stand up for what you believe in. even if your standing alone.​

 

[mike]

in case you didn't realise, from my point of view it is the Church that has reinterpreted the Scriptures.

The Church wrote the Bible.

 

[Achronos]

in case you didn't realise, from my point of view it is the Church that has reinterpreted the Scriptures.

The Church wrote the Bible.

This is entirely the crux of the matter. As long as JSG rallies his view from a biblical standpoint, he forgets who wrote the Bible, who correctly interprets the Bible, and who the Bible is essentially for: The Church.

Let's go through this again: God ->The Church->The Bible, not God->The Bible->The Church.

The Bible outside of it's correct context, which is the Church, has aboslutlely no validility whatsoever. More so itself has no authority or foundation on anything.

The Bible itself, without the Church, practically exhibits a logical fallacy, that of begging the quesiton. "The Bible is true." "But how do you know the Bible is true?" "Because the Bible proves itself to be true". Or better yet, look at the New Testament compared to "apocryphal" gospel documents, how the hell were only four Gospels ever selected? How do you answer that? That's just another form of begging the question.

The main issue here is JSG doesn't trust the Orthodox Church. And I don't necessarily blame him considering how fragmented Christianity is, can the Church even be trusted? You gotta love the Schism of 1054 (I know that ain't the actual date, but for the sake of the argument) and how the ramifications of it would put serious doubts into any sort of Church authority. Hell I can't even convince my mother, a former RC, to trust in the Church when she says no Church can be trusted. And it's all because events like the Great Schism.

I always wondered why God had to make discovering the truth was so damn difficult. Or maybe if someone honestly searches for truth they will find it, I dunno I haven't completetly rationalized that bit yet, maybe it can't.

If anything we would have to convince JSG on why the Church should be trusted and why it has the authority to say what it can. Until we can successfully do that, this debate is fruitless.

 

[Virtus_lb]

@ Virtus_lb
you probly don't care much about my point of view, seeing as I fit into the catigory of "false Christians" you descrided. however:
If you believe in 'your view' of Christianity, even if it is different to the 'view' of 95% of the population. Don't give up on it just because of peer pressure to change views. and Definetly don't give up on it because the local Church isn't supporting you the way you think it should.

stand up for what you believe in. even if your standing alone.​

Dude listen, the word porneia doesn't mean fornication, if you have read my posts, you would have seen it there.

But look how Paul interprets it:

Read 1 Corinthians Chapter 7:

1. And concerning the things of which ye wrote to me: good it is for a man not to touch a woman,

2. and because of the immoralities(porneias) let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her proper husband;

There are many verses that make it clear how Paul interprets this word.

Scientifically, it's true that porneia doesn't mean 'sex before marriage', but Paul says it's a sin to have it.

Paul says that sexual deprivation may cause immorality, thus they should marry. Now does he mean it causes sex before marriage or rape? I think he means sex before marriage.