Narrow path.....

@philokalia said
FMF, does every single thread in Spirituality have to go back to providing basic arguments for the existence of God and the existence of Heaven?

Isn't that a bit tedious?

I am questioning your basis for asserting that two monks went to "Heaven" and how the storyteller could "know" that this was how these monks were "judged". I haven't asked you to go back and provide basic arguments for the existence of God and the existence of "Heaven". Nothing of the sort. [But I do see what you tried to do there by prtending that that was I asked you for, btw.]

@fmf said
I am questioning your basis for asserting that two monks went to "Heaven" and how the storyteller could "know" that this was how these monks were "judged". I haven't asked you to go back and provide basic arguments for the existence of God and the existence of "Heaven". [I see what you tried to do there, btw.] Nothing of the sort. I have asked about how someone can "know" how the monks were "judged".

OK, so you accept the given that there is a God, and that there is a Heaven, correct?

Do you accept that the Gospels are true in this scenario as well?

@philokalia said
OK, so you accept the given that there is a God, and that there is a Heaven, correct?

Do you accept that the Gospels are true in this scenario as well?

I have instead asked about how someone can "know" how the monks were "judged". Is the honest answer, in fact, simply that "very authoritative" sources have told you so and that you are simply relaying these stories to me as purportedly factual because that's just how it works with the "Orthodox tradition"?

@philokalia said
Do you accept that the Gospels are true in this scenario as well?

I can see what you're doing here. My question was very specific. Is the actual answer to my question essentially 'the monks went to "Heaven" because you say so and because other people agree with you and the storyteller "knew" it because you say so, and while you cannot judge, you can assert that the storyteller can "judge"'?

If you consider the Gospels to be completely true and accept their transmission to us as legitimate, you accept the existence of angels and the divine inflience of God on the people, the existence of miracles, and the miracles of Saints, as well as their ability to have true sight when God wishes them to have it.

Correct?

So what are you going to do?

Argue from the perspective of an atheist and derail the thread completely into a fundamental debate about the existence of God..?

Or argue like a Protestant?

My logic here should be rather clear.

@philokalia said
If you consider the Gospels to be completely true and accept their transmission to us as legitimate, you accept the existence of angels and the divine inflience of God on the people, the existence of miracles, and the miracles of Saints, as well as their ability to have true sight when God wishes them to have it.

Correct?

So what are you going to do?

Argue from ...[text shortened]... ut the existence of God..?

Or argue like a Protestant?

My logic here should be rather clear.

I am not trying to have "a fundamental debate about the existence of God". That's a red herring. I am asking you a very specific question. You said you don't know who goes to "Heaven" because you cannot "judge". Why do you believe that the storytellers who wrote the folktales about angels coming for monks was able to "judge" and "know" that those monks were taken to "Heaven"? Is it for the reasons that I have suggested?

@philokalia said
If you consider the Gospels to be completely true and accept their transmission to us as legitimate, you accept the existence of angels and the divine inflience of God on the people, the existence of miracles, and the miracles of Saints, as well as their ability to have true sight when God wishes them to have it.

I am not asking you about "the Gospels" or any other part of the Bible.

I am asking you about a yarn about angels set in the 20th century about a drunkard and some soldiers in Turkey.

And then another yarn from the 19th century about some other monk - "very authoritative stories" you say, although you don't know who it's about for sure, and you say it's "perhaps based off of someone that" someone else knew.

And this is presented as evidence of something that ~ as it so happenes ~ contradicts something else you said.

I am asking you about this stuff. I am not asking you about "the Gospels".

Are you seriously claiming that these folktales have the same status as "the Gospels" and the Bible?

@fmf said
I am not trying to have "a fundamental debate about the existence of God". That's a red herring. I am asking you a very specific question. You said you don't know who goes to "Heaven" because you cannot "judge". Why do you believe that the storytellers who wrote the folktales about angels coming for monks was able to "judge" and "know" that those monks were taken to "Heaven"? Is it for the reasons that I have suggested?

First off, why are you saying they are story tellers writing folk tales?

We are literally talking about St. Nikolai and St. Paisios. I have established that they are Saints. These are respected positions within our Church. What they said is also not classified as a 'folk tale' either.

When you refer to them that way, you are misleading, and the content that I said can no longer be recognized.

I cannot answer your "question" because it isn't about anything that I said, as I have not cited any folk tales made by story tellers.

If you disrespect these Saints again by phrasing it in this way, the statement will be completely ignored. However, if you actually want to sit down and directly insist that these Saints are story tellers creating folk tales, then we can have the discussion, because at least within this bluntness there would be something that I could engage with.

@fmf said
I am not asking you about "the Gospels" or any other part of the Bible.

I am asking you about a yarn about angels set in the 20th century about a drunkard and some soldiers in Turkey.

And then another yarn from the 19th century about some other monk - "very authoritative stories" you say, although you don't know who it's about for sure, and you say it's "perhaps based off ...[text shortened]... Are you seriously claiming that these folktales have the same status as "the Gospels" and the Bible?

(1) Alright, what does it contradict that I said earlier or somewhere else? If that is the case, I really want to know, because then I am totally in the wrong as I do not have a shred of the authority that these Saints have.

(2) They do not have the same status as the Gospels, but they are not "yarns" or "folk tales," and they are on a level far higher than anything I would be able to relate to you, and that even a Bishop or a Minister living today could relate to you who is not a Saint.

The status of these men, as Saints, is the highest status that a human being can have.

@philokalia said
They do not have the same status as the Gospels, but they are not "yarns" or "folk tales," and they are on a level far higher than anything I would be able to relate to you, and that even a Bishop or a Minister living today could relate to you who is not a Saint.

Well you can stop with the red herring about "the Gospels" then. Good. So you believe these storytellers because you er... believe them... and other people also believe them ~ and they are "very authoritative" ~ is that how it works?

@philokalia said
Alright, what does it contradict that I said earlier or somewhere else? If that is the case, I really want to know, because then I am totally in the wrong as I do not have a shred of the authority that these Saints have.

"Judge not lest ye be judged. So I do not know."

But someone you have heard about, by contrast, can "judge" and if they write a folktale - come on, stop denying it - about Turkish soldiers and a drunken monk and "angels" coming to take him to "Heaven" allows you to "know" that he has gone there - to "Heaven" - and you "know" this because the storyteller was "authoritative", because someone told you that as well, is that how it works?

(1) Do I believe the Saints? Yes.

On what authority do they speak? Being among the most elite spiritual fathers in the totality of the Orthodox Church in the 19th & 20th century.

(2) How am I judging?

How are even the Saints judging? They are relaying information.

The initial post is literally about how I cannot say how narrow the path is.

You have been repeating the same material for a while. I do not think that there will be anything new.

I'll let you have the last word.

Matthew 7
12So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
13“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
21“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!

"Salvation by faith alone" / conservative Christians have narrow minds and are on the " broad...road that leads to destruction".

@philokalia said
(1) Do I believe the Saints? Yes.

On what authority do they speak? Being among the most elite spiritual fathers in the totality of the Orthodox Church in the 19th & 20th century.

(2) How am I judging?

How are even the Saints judging? They are relaying information.

The initial post is literally about how I cannot say how narrow the path is.

You hav ...[text shortened]... al for a while. I do not think that there will be anything new.

I'll let you have the last word.

So any old stories about supernatural things from any year, any century [and clearly these are folktales and not historical accounts - did someone actually see the angels "come" and take the monks away and bring them to "Heaven"?] that get written by people who are part of your Church's tradition can get absorbed and perceived as on a comparable level to the canon of "holy" scripture? Is that how it works?

So you believe the Gospels to be true but you also believe that any other stuff like these tales that you have been talking about - if they coincide with your beliefs and "very authoritative sources" assure you they are "true"- then they are declared "true" as well?

You are providing a nice snapshot of the superstitious, credulous mindset. If magical tales fit with the stories already in your head, you subscribe to them in one huge mess of confirmation bias and appeal to authority. It's interesting to behold.

@philokalia said
On what authority do they speak? Being among the most elite spiritual fathers in the totality of the Orthodox Church in the 19th & 20th century.

Are 'fairy tales' these "Saints" write ~ about things like "angels" coming down from "Heaven" [in the 19th & 20th centuries] to take people away ~ are these texts "holy"?

If Benny Hinn joined the Orthodox Church and got declared a "Saint" would that mean you'd have to believe he WASN'T a fraud because he would have been turned into "very authoritative source" and a member of the "elite" of your Church?