tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post8274289715610547727..comments2024-03-12T11:58:24.510+13:00Comments on Otagosh: Chalcedonian PepperGavin Rhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17965552923012880262noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-31363015841157657022011-06-24T12:56:47.731+12:002011-06-24T12:56:47.731+12:00“Theology since Barth is a sad story.” – Jeffrey S...“Theology since Barth is a sad story.” – Jeffrey StoutDeanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15332464950652540647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-31687874570224772682011-06-24T08:46:09.431+12:002011-06-24T08:46:09.431+12:00Thanks for the links! I appreciate that you see t...Thanks for the links! I appreciate that you see this as larger than a Presbyterian issue.John Shuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00798753206614838161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-8770988331638715942011-06-21T11:03:56.342+12:002011-06-21T11:03:56.342+12:00"Heretics choose the other path, instead of j...<em>"Heretics choose the other path, instead of just believing what they're told to believe."</em><br /><br />Nicely put.<br /><br />And then we get steamrollered by the "orthodox" crowd, just because they can't burn us at the stake anymore. (Much as they might like to!)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-67410905702554893212011-06-20T09:08:48.203+12:002011-06-20T09:08:48.203+12:00What are creeds for? They're a simple way of ...What are creeds for? They're a simple way of separating Us (who believe the right stuff) from Them (who don't). Orthodoxy (the straight path) and heterodoxy (the other path). True believers (Us) and heretics (as defined by Us). And once we've sorted out who are what, we can burn the heretics.<br /><br />You know what I like about the word "heretic"? It comes from a Greek root meaning "choice". Heretics <i>choose</i> the other path, instead of just believing what they're told to believe.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05563567846973942209noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-91057870950186231132011-06-19T08:31:42.768+12:002011-06-19T08:31:42.768+12:00Just to clarify, the statement you quote is from t...Just to clarify, the statement you quote is from the article John Shuck is reacting to. His position is quoted in the blue text beneath.Gavin Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17965552923012880262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-39183661782291576742011-06-19T00:27:06.718+12:002011-06-19T00:27:06.718+12:00John Shuck wrote: "... Presbyterians believe ...John Shuck wrote: "... Presbyterians believe that Jesus Christ is "fully human and fully divine, one person in two natures, without confusion and without change, without separation and without division." This statement dates all the way back to the fifth century (451 to be exact) and is known as the Chalcedonian Definition ..."<br /><br />The apostle John would use another phrase of 4 words to describe that Chalcedonian Definition:<br /><br />"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." 1 John 4:3<br /><br />Which 4 words? "... that spirit of antichrist...", which makes Christ out to be something He wasn't.<br /><br />When Christ walked this earth He was flesh, blood and bone...fully human! He was not "fully human" plus fully anything else.<br /><br />Christ was like us. How so?<br /><br />Hebrews 2:14 “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same..." <br /><br />John GJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04044475793379087425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52912413020249030.post-60906024978430152012011-06-18T14:16:19.227+12:002011-06-18T14:16:19.227+12:00The most significant thing I got from this Post:
...The most significant thing I got from this Post:<br /><br /><i>There were losers.</i><br /><br />As I thought about it in context, I found it profoundly disturbing.<br /><br />Anyone else?<br /><br />Think about it for awhile.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com