/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>830241

Nah.

This is somewhat small fry, epidemic wise.

There are several (!) threads about this up right now, so I will hijack this one and ask the following: Is it, in this time, and for an unbaptized Orthodox such as myself, lawful to write down and serve the Divine liturgy YOURSELF in your own room?

>>830250

God, no.

It's not legal even for a priest to do so, if he doesn't have a Antimension, let another a layman.

Just watch a livestream, and calm down.

God knows and will honor your faith and enthusiasm.

>>830251

*let alone

>>830251

I understand, thank you.

>>830250

Are you just starting off as an inquirer? Because, and no offense, this is a very silly question.

>>830251

this guy who takes the name of God in vain, employing it as an expletive, is the guy to advise you on doctrine

listen to him well, for surely he is of the people and wisdom will die with him

Ignore the naysayers and the jerks here. Yours is a good and honest question that we should rightly examine given the events of today. These are not normal events and we've noticed the world become vastly more unstable.

Anyways, there's a few things we can point to that will support the fact we're in the endtimes. In the Book of Daniel, it talks about the four kingdoms which will be there at the endtimes. A lion, a bear, a dragon and a leopard. The lion with its wings ripped off and given the mind of a human. The obvious answer to this is, it's England. England's symbol is the barbary lion. Its wings were ripped off when they abandoned the British Empire and implemented universal healthcare, using the mind of man. The bear is Russia and the three ribs could of different leaderships, the Czars, the Communists, and Putin. The dragon is China. And the leopard, what do you think of when you think of leopard? Something that attacks anyone and everyone? That almost sounds like America who's been at war with an extremely large number of nations.

In other places in the Bible we see mention of the early and latter rain, when God would bless the world with miracles. I don't know about you, but I've seen plenty. We see talks of the great falling away, a lot of Christians falling away and we've seen that. We see talks of how people will be lovers of themselves. People are promoting schizophrenia as a good thing and transgenderism doesn't have any mental disorder association? Yeah, we're there.

We can then go through the book of Revelation and point to various things that collide with today. The locusts seem to be like China's military.

I can go on and on, but I think there's two big, big ones:

1. The west isn't mentioned in Revelation. Let's take a real examination of that. Is there a chance America doesn't survive? Our debt will crush us and if that's not enough, our military uses planes that are falling apart. We have enemies in China and Russia that would love to see us fall and may very well be the ones to do this.

2. The Bible talks about Damascus falling. It hasn't yet, it's one of the longest, continually populated cities in history, yet it hasn't fallen. I don't think anyone would be surprised if it's gone soon, given the war. I've met Syrian refugees. It's bad over there.

Anyways, I can go on and on, but the reality is, we can see more and more ways in which the world ends. We're here. Pray to God, get a relationship with Him, we're in the endgame.

>>830250

The first thing you should always do for questions like this is ask a priest.

Now, to add to what others have said, it's not so much that it is "wrong" or "illegal" to do serve the liturgy by oneself, it's just a misunderstanding of what the liturgy is. The liturgy is the gathering of the body of Christ, the Church, to offer thanks to God. It's written as a call and response between the priest and the people. Are you going to call and respond with yourself? It sounds absurd. The liturgy is not a series of magic words, it serves a very specific (albeit central) function.

Besides that, there are myriads of other offices and prayers written specifically for individual use. And if all else fails, there is always the Jesus prayer.

But once again, a rule of prayer is something very personal that is best talked about only with one's spiritual father. I realize this is a special time, so I understand this might be difficult if you don't have one yet. In the meantime study Scripture, read the Fathers, even a line or two a day. Be patient, this too shall pass..

>>830290

Ignore this guy. If priests had all the answers, they'd have gotten rid of all the pedophiles in the church. I'm not ragging on Catholicism, I'm ragging on the absolutely idiotic idea that you must go through clergy to get answers. Part of being a Christian is reasoning. Does the Bible not say "come let us reason"? If it does, then why does a priest need to be interjected? I love the clergy, but this guy here is only trying to separate you from God and seeing the mysteries untold numbers have only dreamed of experiencing.

By the way, I'm the guy who said yeah we're here in the end times right above him. I'm just on my phone.

>>830250

Dude, get Baptized! What are you doing? That should be the first thing you do as a Christian.

>>830264

>his guy who takes the name of God in vain

"God, no" is synonymous with "God forbid," which is used many times to address ecclesiastical questions.

<>Rom.3:3,4 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

<>Rom.3:5,6 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man) God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world

<>Rom.3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

<>Rom.6:1,2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid.

<>Rom.6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

<>Rom.7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

<>Rom.7:13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

<>Rom.9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

<>Rom.11:1,2 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew

<>Rom.11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

<>1 Cor.6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.

<>Gal.2:17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

<>Gal.3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

<>Gal.6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.

>>830307

The Bible says where two or more are gathered in his name, he's there. So, you're changing it.

Did the Bible then give us prophecies among prophecies so we can ignore them and say we can't know? That simply seems dumb. What's to reason if we're not supposed to as you're insinuating?

You're simply interested in attacking those who read the Bible and it's obvious by your lack of understanding of it.

As for the attack on priests, perhaps uncalled for, but even more uncalled for is telling a person interested in the endtimes that they need to take this to a priest and can't reason their way to it, as the Bible says to. You're rewriting it and that's wrong.

>>830307

Oh yeah, as for the disease being worse, there will be worse, but but there will also be wars, rumors of wars and more that there weren't during the plague. I noticed you didn't dispel any of the other things I mentioned above that couldn't be linked to the black plague. Huh. I wonder why.

>>830296

>"God, no" is synonymous with "God forbid,"

perhaps i misjudged you, and you weren't using the name of God as mere emphasis on a statement, thus taking his name in vain - only you truly know - and if so, you have my apologies

but in western parlance you're unlikely to find folks using anything other than 'God Forbid' when they mean God Forbid, more often hearing such an utterance as 'God, no' as an expletive on par with 'Oh My God' for we are a people of unclean lips uttering such irreverent blasphemies continually

>>830241

Probably and yes it is. But a sign of the end times in a different sense. It's most likely a Psyop not an actual illness. In that sense it's a sign of the end times like many other things.

>>830307

>psychology today

Is there an actual source for these numbers?

>>830321

>A pandemic is a psyop

I would like to once again ask for more information on this.

It makes no sense, is too big of a coverup, provides no benefits for the elites, and requires opposing powers to work together with each other.

>>830322

<sarcasm>You got me. that's a fake website and I totally lied my ass off. All little kids in the Catholic Church are raped at least once during mass and then passed around for anyone else in the parish to use, you protestants are on to us!</sarcasm>

Yes, those are real numbers

I put the link there so you could look them up. Find another reason to lie about God's Church, okay?

>>830323

>provides no benefits for the elites

You haven't heard of ID2020, I take it.

>requires opposing powers to work together with each other

A single global government (controlled by them) has been an open goal of the 6*10^6 for ages now.

>>830326

>Haha well you must not have heard of-

Yes I have.

They could have passed it by other means, people are complacent as is. Having a economic crisis which breaks GDP is uncharacteristic.

>A single global government (controlled by them) has been an open goal of the 6*10^6 for ages now.

You don't know how that works do you?

How would that work? China and America are going to set aside their differences to have a "monopoly"?

It doesn't work that way. That would be a duopoly and they're not willing to go for that.

Nevermind that its still too big of a coverup to have. You could at least admit that its a real virus.

>>830324

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm only asking for primary sources

Your pic would be better if you put "US Dept of education study X" and "John Jay College of Criminal Justice"

Also if you didn't use clipart

>>830331

?? Not sure why you posted. This is petty.

>>830332

Yes, I know. Psychology Today is a propaganda source. I find it credible because usually they'd be slamming the church.

You're right that they twisted the word homosexual to mean something it doesn't mean i.e. not pedophile.

85% of the sex abuse in the Catholic Church is against little boys. Ergo, homosexual and pedophile.

The Church once excluded even latent, non-practicing homosexuals from the seminaries. Not anymore.

>>830336

I'm really not being petty but you don't get to complain after

>Find another reason to lie about God's Church, okay?

I also want to deal with trustworthy information, that's all

>>830336

The main reason why the issue is so contentious is not simply that sodomites have infiltrated into the RCC. As others have pointed out, that has happened in many institutions.

The main reason why this issue is so controversial is how the leadership of the RCC has handled the cases. They simply shuffle the sodomite priests into another area and try to downplay or cover up the issue rather than making a legitimate good faith effort to expel them and distance themselves from it. Rather than openly expelling the sodomites and denouncing it, they instead do nothing but move him to another area and engage in deflection tactics (i.e. downplaying the severity, casting doubt on the claims beyond a reasonable level, blaming the genuine victims, organized whatabout-ism, or deflecting away from the issue of why the priest was not expelled) when this issue is raised.

>>830341

>As others have pointed out, that has happened in many institutions.

But it should never have been possible in the Catholic Church. This grave sin against the clergy has driven many good people away from the church and has harmed many, many children.

>The main reason why this issue is so controversial is how the leadership of the RCC has handled the cases. They simply shuffle the sodomite priests into another area and try to downplay or cover up the issue rather than making a legitimate good faith effort to expel them and distance themselves from it.

I'd agree with that. It's a legit criticism. They wanted more priest and not to lose them because they were unfit. Money, I believe, was the issue. I'd rather a smaller Church of the faithful than a bigger church that has given up the faith to be popular with the wicked.

>>830342

IMHO, a Popular Pope is a bad Pope, especially if he's popular with the wicked.

>>830345

your argument is coherent and well informed, but unfortunately the RCC can't use such an appeal to the authority of Scripture since that would then leave them open to the attack that if they like the Bible so much how come so many of their modern doctrines are completely alien to it

>>830345

>Ye shall know them by their fruits.

If anything, that only serves to validate the Church who has bore such splendid fruits of faith. The fact that there are sinners who need a Saviour in the Church does not disprove centuries upon centuries of fruits and to disregard this fact to polemically nitpick the bad examples is not argue in good faith.

>I believe this is an issue of misplaced faith not only in the money and resources of impious men, but also an issue of shared guilt, as the priests run confessionals and so expelling one (or having him "outed") will expose the whole order to having many more terrible sins exposed.

Catholic priests have heroically faced death before revealing the secrets of confession. It is a very grave and serious matter. Your cynicism is misplaced, brother. These are still Christian people.

>>830352

>modern doctrines

There is no such thing.

>>830357

<modern doctrines

> There is no such thing.

yep, couldn't agree more, the apostles were all about granting plenary indulgences if a pilgrim attended a conference in dublin

… notorious for it in fact, always sending christians to ireland to get free from the punishments of purgatory, so much so that the celtic tourist board had to set up hundreds of information booths for all the new arrivals, cutting down large swathes of timber and that's why there's no snakes in ireland since they didn't have anything to hang out on anymore

>>830365

Your argument rests on the fact that the KJV is the only right one, but it's the KJV that says in Psalm 12:

6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Which means, God will preserve his word from generation to generation. Either that is right or not. Either you are right or the KJV is right.

>>830465

Isaiah 59:21 says the same thing though and it's even more explicit.

I do believe Psalm 12 says what it says there, but I like to use it as an example where modern versions are changing it because they know they don't believe that so they had to alter it similar to how they altered 2 Cor. 2:17, John 5:39, Proverbs 13:13, etc.. Psalm 12:6-7 is one of the best examples because you can see clearly how they gradually changed it. See the following progression.

KJV (1900)

>The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

>Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

<NASB (1971)

>The words of the LORD are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times.

>You, O LORD, will keep them; You will preserve him from this generation forever.

<ESV (2001)

>The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.

>You, O Lord, will keep them; you will guard us from this generation forever.

<CSB (2017)

>The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in an earthen furnace, purified seven times.

>You, Lord, will guard us; you will protect us from this generation forever.

Notice how the second verse went from "them" both times in historical Bibles, then "them" and "him" in NASB, then "them" and "us" and lastly "us" and "us" in the 2017 CSB. So which one do they actually think it is, and why do they keep gradually changing it instead of just translating it once and for all, how they think it actually is?

>>830472

The meaning is seen if you search it out. That being said, none of the translations you give exactly change anything in a real way. It almost seems as if God placed it in KJV for those who will have a problem with it all.

>>830461

Your facetiousness amuses only yourself, brother. The forms that penance took through the ages do not change the fact that repentance is necessary for reconciliation.

>>830476

i didn't expect my mockery of your belief system to amuse you, since i know you are trusting to the roman catholic church for the safety of your eternal soul

but since you are trusting to a system that has grown into a gross misshapen lump bringing into its dogmas such novel ideas as the apostles would have decried apostate, i sought instead to cut you to the quick and so begin removing that tumour

>>830481

>i didn't expect my mockery of your belief system to amuse you

So you merely default to being unpleasant when in proximity with people you disagree with? Juvenile.

>i know you are trusting to the roman catholic church for the safety of your eternal soul

I trust Our Lord Christ. What exactly is your question here?

>but since you are trusting to a system that has grown into a gross misshapen lump bringing into its dogmas such novel ideas as the apostles would have decried apostate, i sought instead to cut you to the quick and so begin removing that tumour

How presumptuous. The Church does not seek novelty and your insistence on this doesn't make it true. And all because of some rather unfortunate takes on how the Church decided to regulate penance for a time? Extraordinarily myopic. It's quite unfortunate that this inspires you to sow disunity among Christians with such shallow polemics, brother.

>>830474

>The meaning is seen if you search it out.

Well, it is seen in an accurate Bible.

>That being said, none of the translations you give exactly change anything in a real way.

I'm not sure what you mean by "real way" but I've seen people object to that verse you quoted saying the KJV is wrong, ostensibly because they object to the idea of God preserving his words. They are completely wrong. Actually it's their poor understanding of the underlying language in this case. In particular, the second "their" comes from a word that is semantically plural but grammatically singular. This happens in our language as well, just as the word "everyone" in English. We would say everyone "is" here and "they" are well. We wouldn't say "everyone are here" because the word is gramatically singular. We also wouldn't say "everyone is here and he is well" because the word is a singular word referring to a plurality.

So the NASB rendering at very least I can understand how they might not fully grasp that and translate it that way. Some older English Bibles made without the full grammatical and translational background of the KJV translators did the same, in this case. The point however being that verse 7 is referring to God preserving his words. Where the NASB muddies the waters, the ESV and CSB take that and run with it by changing it completely, first one word and then by the same twisted logic, the other. So no more God preserving his words to them, I guess. It matches the reality that they've denied the fact of it.

>It almost seems as if God placed it in KJV for those who will have a problem with it all.

Well God placed it many places and we're very fortunate to have such a highly precise and accurate, documented and well defined language, with which to meditate continually on these words.

No.

https://bibleprophecytalk.com/bpt-2-0-straight-talk-about-pestilence-in-bible-prophecy-coronotvirus-covid19/

>>830485

< i didn't expect my mockery of your belief system to amuse you

> So you merely default to being unpleasant when in proximity with people you disagree with? Juvenile.

lets get one thing clear here, you knew i was disparaging of roman catholicism before you chose to engage me (see >>830352 ) so you've no cause for complaint if i remain consistent in that derision

tl;dr this is what you wanted, enjoy the wild ride

< i know you are trusting to the roman catholic church for the safety of your eternal soul

> I trust Our Lord Christ. What exactly is your question here?

is there any question that you are holding to the authority of the roman catholic church to reveal to you the person of Christ and His gospel, which you are placing your trust in, for the security of your eternal soul ?

then i have no questions, your position has been made plain by numerous other folks who seek to defend the RCC

but look friend, i get it - i'm attacking the very thing from which you derive your entire Theology, and your understanding of how God reconciles men to Himself; so i understand if you feel personally assaulted since i'm taking cracks at the rock on which you place your trust, the foundation stone of your beliefs - you'll probably notice the reverberations running through your walls and rattling the stained glass

but you might also notice, i haven't directed anything at you or your character; which on the whole seems rather sincere and consistent - it's just that i think you're sincerely wrong to place your faith in an edifice that has departed so far from the faith of the apostles as to be anathema; adding to the work of Christ such necessities as plenary indulgences… which themselves could have been earned by attending a conference in Dublin in 2018

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/pope-to-grant-indulgences-at-dublin-world-meeting-of-families-1.3507711

this is what i was alluding to in >>830461 and while you seemed to want to argue that such forms of penance may have had different expressions through the ages ( see >>830476 ) - perhaps from a desire to say that was all in the past - instead i would happily grant that such pilgrimages are in no way novel to the last 1400 years of the roman catholic church, but i must point out that they are completely alien to anything taught by Christ and the apostles, and thus are by very definition 'innovations'; excesses in religion which sever one from Christ

(Galations 1, Gal 5)

and i did so as scathingly as i could, because if you are trusting yourself to such a system as makes you think you can earn God's favour or satisfy His Justice just by hitching a ride to ireland, then you need to alarmed

actually on second thoughts, alarmed is not the word

'quaking in your boots' would be more appropriate

~

donning a trip in case we keep going itt

>>830512

I would engage if you didn't strike me as yet another rude, juvenile, incredibly presumptuous poster on /christian/. Yet this is the kind of rhetoric that Catholics are all too accustomed. I will not engage, I do not presume your good faith and I just find your rudeness infantile and off-putting.

Peace of Christ be with you, brother.

>>830524

It's like talking with the Red Guard of China. It's an insular, cult-like community where They believe only their own revisionist history, its own self developed mythos, their own party-approved histories, and anything else is an seen as being of the devil, even reading the Bible itself. They try to recruit or commandeer others support with the friendly outgoing routine but this highly insular cultlike paranoia is what they really think. For one who savours only after popular approval, for seeming to be pious, it might be a persuasive portfolio, but for one who savours the things of God (Luke 16:15) it is retrograde, and ultimately, glorifying itself, and its own traditions and idiosyncratic superstitions above God's own Word and the true sayings of God. We'd have been better off had this person simply not even began posting. Instead, he should have been reading the truth.

>>830529

Why are you also using this opportunity to insult me, brother? What wrong have I done to you?

It's not necessarily the end. But it certainly is a judgement. Pray that it becomes an occasion for people to repent. The actual End will leave no chance at all for repentance. This is God being somewhat nice.

And stop weeping for the degenerates of this world. These people either maligned God or let those who malign God to get away with too much - and so are guilty themselves for the state of the world.

>For this is what the Lord says: “Do not enter a house where there is a funeral meal; do not go to mourn or show sympathy, because I have withdrawn my blessing, my love and my pity from this people,” declares the Lord. "Both high and low will die in this land. They will not be buried or mourned, and no one will cut themselves or shave their head for the dead. No one will offer food to comfort those who mourn for the dead—not even for a father or a mother—nor will anyone give them a drink to console them." - Jeremiah 16:5,6

>

BTW..800,000 children (or thereabouts) are aborted every year in the US alone. Every year. Every year!!!!!! Yet no one cries about it being the end of the world. Suddenly a bunch of NYC boomers choke to death and it's the Apocalypse.

I don't want to hear it.

>>830553

>Yet no one cries about it being the end of the world.

It is to me. It's the erupting emergency. They are implementing talmudic law. But remember Psalm 94 my friend and meditate carefully on those passages of scripture, Do so every day. They helped me get through these times.

>>830534

It's not about you or me or you doing anything to me or me doing anything to you. It's about wrong ideas leading people down a wrong path. I only have the eternal truth of God's word in mind and I am treating your posts as I would treat my own self if I had poste, or thought, the same cunningly devised fables or anyone else. I rebuke that, on the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. And this much should be obvious by the anonymous format here.

>>830563

Thank you. The only thing that keeps me positive is other Christians who do see the gravity of it. And thank you for reminding me of the Psalm.

>>830563

Also, sorry for saying "no one". It's a silly exaggeration on my part. I was typing that whilst hearing the news in another tab. It's aggravating to hear the drama about this compared to other tragedies, but I know I'm not alone.

>>830241

The end times began at Pentecost. (Pre-)Millennialism is foreign to the true Church.

>>830250

A bit late but to offer an actual answer to your question, no, but you can serve the Typika.

https://www.saintjonah.org/services/typica.htm

https://www.saintjonah.org/typ/

If its not then this is

Archive.is/Sq47r

Are you guys ready?

>>830241

People have been prophesying the end times for centuries. I would not be surprised if in 200 years time, there is another calamity that prompts the same kind of speculation.

>>830563

A lot of horrible things are happening and always have been that doesn't mean

>IS DA END TIMES YO

That leads to fear and panic and because of the internet we are seeing the affects of it.