2,641 reputation
51962
bio website
location Taiwan
age
visits member for 3 years, 10 months
seen 54 mins ago

I often chose best answers not because they are the best, but because I have to choose a best answer. Please, don't take offense to it.


Jun
21
comment Why were none of the Apostolic fathers' writings included in the last canon accepted in the Ecumenical Councils?
Nice answer. Thank you.
Jun
10
comment Why were none of the Apostolic fathers' writings included in the last canon accepted in the Ecumenical Councils?
@BYE: "Each of those councils either approved or disapproved different writings, and as a result there are differing canons" - Then I am interested in the very latest canon, that is the one that was accepted in the latest of the Ecumenical Councils of that time, the one that finally approved the canon that we have until today.
Jun
9
comment Why were none of the Apostolic fathers' writings included in the last canon accepted in the Ecumenical Councils?
@BYE: "You need to tell us exactly which canon you are referring to. If you are referring to the original writings which were authorized to make the Christian faith acceptable to Constantine, or later Ecumenical Councils" - Yes, I mean the Ecumenical Councils.
Jun
4
comment Evidence that Ignatius of Antioch was ordained by the Apostles
No problem. Thank you.
Jun
3
comment Evidence that Ignatius of Antioch was ordained by the Apostles
(2) word "tragedy". In my language this word can be easily applied to the outcomes of war, for example, it would be absolutely fine to say "What Hitler did to us in the WWII was a huge tragedy for our nation", however, once I really offended one American when I told him that what had happened on 9-11 was a real tragedy for the USA, to what he angrily said, "That was not a tragedy! That was an attack!"
Jun
3
comment Evidence that Ignatius of Antioch was ordained by the Apostles
(1) "If you already knew the ancient sources for the traditions in question, why not say so in your question? And why refuse to countenance non-contemporary sources as evidence?" - I think it's all about my poor knowledge of English. The thing is I thought that the English word "evidence" meant only the contemporary sources (just like in my language) and any relevant assertions made centuries later would be deemed as merely "references", but now I see that obviously the word "evidence" has a broader meaning in English. It's just like the ↙
Jun
3
comment Evidence that Ignatius of Antioch was ordained by the Apostles
Thank you. I DID read Wikipedia prior to asking this question and I DID get familiar with all the resources that you have "tracked down for me". All of them come from people that are set apart from Ignatius by more than two centuries. They themselves never saw Ignatius in person and couldn't have physically communicated to him face to face or through epistles. Therefore, they are all merely references, but hardly be classed as evidence. What I need, however, is the evidence, that is, some materials contemporary to Ignatius' life.
May
30
comment Does Eastern Orthodoxy teach that there are other Apostles?
This title seems to be non-correlating to a position in Church hierarchy as some on the list are bishops, some are political figures, and some are just common people. Also, the list stops on Nicholas of Japan who died in 1912. Does that mean that nowadays there is no one equal to the Apostles in the Orthodox Church?
May
28
comment Does Eastern Orthodoxy teach that there are other Apostles?
"Arggh, I mis-read the question. I thought he was referring to the seventy as "other than the 12" - Which is exactly what I meant in my question - meaning that those 70 were other than the 12 - so you didn't mis-read it.
May
28
comment Does Eastern Orthodoxy teach that there are other Apostles?
"So not just Orthodox but also Catholics and Protestants believe there were other apostles and disciples besides "the Twelve" - Perhaps, I am wrong, but as far as the Eastern Orthodoxy is concerned, I see them today have and use such titles in their hierarchy as "deacon", "priest", "bishop", "metropolitan" and "patriarch", but never "apostle".
May
25
comment Scriptural basis for monarchical episcopate
"So Judas wasn't even an Apostle when he was alive?" - Yes, he was. But he was not among those Apostles who, according to that article, became qualified to be bishops after the Lord's mission was accomplished.
May
25
comment Scriptural basis for monarchical episcopate
"Do you doubt Matthias, who replaced Judas, was a bishop?" - I'm just trying to follow the logic of the definition in the article that you have cited. That article asserts the idea of apostles being bishops with a definition of apostles being the ones whom Jesus sent to teach and baptize all the nations after Jesus' mission was accomplished. Based on Acts 1:21 we can tell for sure that Matthias was among those sent ones, and, therefore, following the logic of the article, he is a bishop; however, Judas Iscariot was not among those whom Jesus was sending - he was already dead by then.
May
25
comment Scriptural basis for monarchical episcopate
"** Yes, the Apostles were bishops...**" - That article, the link to which you have provided, basis the idea of Apostolate-episcopate on the definition of the Apostles: "sent into the world a body of teachers and preachers after Jesus' mission was accomplished", however, Judas Iscariot was never among those whom He sent to teach all the nations baptizing them into the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit.
May
25
comment Why First Epistle to St. John by St. Ignatius of Antioch is considered to be spurious?
WOW!! Great answer! Thank you.
May
25
comment Scriptural basis for monarchical episcopate
I don't understand. Peter applies these words to Judas Iscariot. Does this mean that Judas was a bishop?!
May
20
comment Do the Orthodox pray to John the Baptist?
Can you, please, provide some sources.
May
20
comment Do the Orthodox pray to John the Baptist?
@curiousdannii - I don't have any quotes or references. I just saw them pray to many different saints, yet have never seen them pray to John the Baptist. This was all that prompted my question.
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
But... isn't it like all the early Church Fathers, when speaking about the story of presentation of Mary draw that story from the Protevangelium?
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
@MattGutting - "The belief is buttressed by its presence in the Protevangelium, but that doesn't mean they accept the book as a whole as part of their tradition" - In other words, they have some other sources besides the Protevangelium that tells them about that story, right?
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
@MattGutting - "It sounds as if you're asking how these churches decided to choose books for their canon" - No. Apocrypha are by definition not part of canon. I am asking about how they decide which Apocrypha they still keep as a part of their tradition, and which Apocrypha they don't consider to be a part of their tradition.