The Saint Euphrosynos Cafe

Deacon Nikolai wrote:

Matthew, argue ideas, do not attack people..

I did not attack the person, but his methodology of argument. Opinions without supportive evidence are empty.

As for those who believed that God required blood atonement for sin, it is a view of God which Christ satisfies, but if one doesn't have such a view of God then Christ's death as atonement for sins is irrelevant. Irrelevant perhaps if you do not have a Biblical understanding of Christian theology. ...

As for those who believed that God required blood atonement for sin, it is a view of God which Christ satisfies, but if one doesn't have such a view of God then Christ's death as atonement for sins is irrelevant. Irrelevant perhaps if you do not have a Biblical understanding of Christian theology.

scwaterfowl wrote:

If you are ROCOR and oppose this union, what will you do??

Sane people shouldn't have to care about what the radical fringe chooses to do, including the Moscow Patriarch.

The theory of substitutionary atonement is particularly Western, sorry, that a fact. It relates to a particular idea of God which we don't have. You appear as if you haven't read Scripture. Without blood sacrifice, there is no remission of sin. Period. Hbr 9:22 And almost all things are by the law ...

Substitutionary atonement as taught in the Protestant from RCC/Augustine doctrines relates salvation back to Yom Kippur type idea and more or less ignores that God's mercy and forgiveness were available before Christ. Substitutionary atonement is taught in Scripture. Isa 53:5 But he [was] wounded f...

With that line of reasoning, couldn't depictions of the Transfiguration be considered crypto-Nestorian for emphasizing the deity of Christ? Nestorianism overemphasizes the humanity of Christ. But emphasizing one nature instead of another could be misinterpreted as separating Christ into two persons...