Is anyone else having problems at OrthodoxChristianity.net?

[Kollyvas]

Evlogeite.
1). If I would have specifically mentioned "Copts" being forced into becoming janissaries, then your statement about my vagueness would be accurate. However, it was addressed personally to one person who happened to be Coptic in the context of very unpleasant and disinformative interchanges. The thread I referenced is not unpopular--it has to do with "violence committed against the Coptic people." While i know that I do post regularly, the interest that thread has generated surely must be weighed before asserting I wish ill toward Copts, for if that were true, it would be blatantly clear on such a thread.

2). The policies of your forum aside, the import of its wars here was most troubling. These things surely could have been nipped in the bud there.

3). This type of hostility with Non Chalcedonians is patently unnecessary. These people could be on the verge of reentering Orthodoxy after 1500 years of schism. This is a process we have to facillitate with Traditionalist input, which they welcome.

R

[Anastasios]

1). If I would have specifically mentioned "Copts" being forced into becoming janissaries, then your statement about my vagueness would be accurate. However, it was addressed personally to one person who happened to be Coptic in the context of very unpleasant and disinformative interchanges. The thread I referenced is not unpopular--it has to do with "violence committed against the Coptic people." While i know that I do post regularly, the interest that thread has generated surely must be weighed before asserting I wish ill toward Copts, for if that were true, it would be blatantly clear on such a thread.

Oh, ok, I feel so much better knowing that you only wish slavery on one person...

2). The policies of your forum aside, the import of its wars here was most troubling. These things surely could have been nipped in the bud there.

Kollyvas, HOW AM I RESPONSIBLE IF TWO PEOPLE OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL LEAVE MY FORUM TO POST HERE?

3). This type of hostility with Non Chalcedonians is patently unnecessary. These people could be on the verge of reentering Orthodoxy after 1500 years of schism. This is a process we have to facillitate with Traditionalist input, which they welcome.

You are the one who just criticized me becuase you thought I was censuring the Athonite position. Then I explain I accept hte Athonite teachigns on the subject and now you defned them and say they're on the brink of converting so why be polemical towards them? I don't understand what your position is...you are totally confusing me here, buddy.

Anastasios

[Kollyvas]

I don't want slavery for anyone, but certain choices have consequences and one needs to direct attention to imminent ruin when certain ideas are foisted into parliance.
R
The polemics lie in redirecting dialogue so that if reunion is achieved, it isn't the cause of further schisms. I don't think the Athonites will be alone in breaking Communion if the current framework is set in motion without amendment. We all understand there can be no reunion without oneness of Faith.

[joselauro]

Hi! Are you still here?:)
I must appolagize for this. I am sorry. There is a guy here in my country which belongs to this church and as he thinks his church and OC are the same thing. And of course we cannot accept this. But I think it is just he 's personal position. Perhaps it was the reason for my beavior.
Sorry.

P.S. This is the kind of thing WCC created.
http://www.orthodoxunity.org

[ioannis]

EkhristosAnesti wrote:

The Greek language has always been part of the Coptic heritage; Sts. Athanasios, Cyril, Dioscoros, and Severos were very well-educated in the Greek language.

Not surprising with St. Athanasios since he was Greek. There were always many Greeks in Egypt (Cleopatra, the final kings of Egypt, Eratosthenes, ect.) especially from the time of Alexander the Great.

The Oriental Orthodox Church considers herself to be THE Orthodox Church just as much as your Church does.

Well the Latins and the Protestants, and just about everybody considers themselves to be “Orthodox” too. But did you know that not even having the name “Jesus Christ” will make you an Orthodox Christian? In fact, it won’t even get you a driver's license in West Virginia.

Give me ONE objective reason as to why your Church has right to it, and why mine doesn't. That's a challenge SIR.

I think the real point joselauro was making is that you do not have the same faith as he does, and you have essentially admitted as much in your other posts here (I think). So he is saying this shows you are not a member of the church (which we believe is Diophysite) because of this.

[Kollyvas]

KHRISTOS ANESTI!!!

Evlogeite Ioannis.

Just wanted to remind you that since Alexander the Great until Egypt was surrendered to the islamists, its culture was the zenith of Hellenic civilization, and the Copts were a unique and thoroughly advanced synthesis of ancient civilizations. Alexandria was the first "Greek" city of the Emprire while Constantinople was still undergoing phase I construction. Their theological school was the best in the Church. The fact they fell into schism was a great tragedy, but at this juncture they may be returning, and they should be welcomed.
Alithos Anesti!
Rostislav

[EkhristosAnesti]

Not surprising with St. Athanasios since he was Greek.

Whether or not St. Athanasios was Greek or not is debateable, but not a debate that is of any interest or concern to me.

I should also like to clarify that though St. Severos is (and always will be) considered a great Saint of the Coptic Orthodox Church, he is not in fact Coptic, but Syrian.

Well the Latins and the Protestants, and just about everybody considers themselves to be “Orthodox” too.

But the Latins are quite happy with the title RC, and the Protestants are quite happy with title Protestant, so even if they believe their doctrines and positions to be Orthodox in substance, they do not claim to be "the Orthodox Church". The Oriental Orthodox Church does however lay claim to being "The Orthodox Church". The title "Oriental Orthodox" is only made for the sake of convenience in "EO"/OO dialogues, to distinguish the Chalcedonian Church from the non-Chalcedonian Church. Even these titles , "Chalcedonian" and "non-Chalcedonian", are made for the sake of convenience, but our Church will certainly not accept "non-Chalcedonian" as an absolute title of our identity, as if that very identity is contingent upon our rejection of what we consider to be a schismatic Council. It would make as much sense as your Church being titled the "Non-Trent Church".

My ultimate point therefore, was that there is no more validity in the complaint amongst the Chalcedonians, regarding a Copts' claim to Orthodoxy, or a Syrians' claim to Orthodoxy, any more than a Greeks' claim to Orthodoxy or a Russians' claim to Orthodoxy. The Coptic Church officially goes by the name "The Coptic Orthodox Church", and not the "Coptic non-Chalcedonian Church" or the "Coptic Oriental Orthodox Church".

I think the real point joselauro was making is that you do not have the same faith as he does

But the issue here is, that in presupossing his own faith to be "THE Orthodox faith" he is attempting to argue the invalidity of the Coptic Church laying claim to be of "The Orthodox Church". When the Coptic Church lays claim to being of "The Orthodox Church", we are not claiming we have the same faith as your Church, since according to our framework "The Orthodox Church" is a reference to what you would regard as "The Non-Chalcedonian Church".