CANON XI.
LET no one in the priestly order nor any layman eat the unleavened bread of the Jews, nor have any familiar intercourse with them, nor summon them in illness, nor receive medicines from them, nor bathe with them; but if anyone shall take in hand to do so, if he is a cleric, let him be deposed, but if a layman let him be cut off.
NOTES.
ASCIENT EPITOME OF CANON XI.
Jewish unleavened bread is to be refused. Whoever even calls in Jews as physicians or bathes with them is to be deposed.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/trullo.html
So ... are you in agreement with this?
ReplyDeleteNo, they aren't.
ReplyDeleteIt is repugnant.
LeeU said:
ReplyDelete"So ... are you in agreement with this?"
I've quoted this in the context of an ongoing debate with a lay Orthodox apologist.
No, this doesn't speak for me. Quite the contrary.
But the Orthodox are committed to these concilar canons.
Are you really this stupid? Our religious texts say many things that are hateful. Some of this may have been practiced long ago.
ReplyDeleteThis does not happen today. Jews help everyone including their enemies.
Should we judge every modern Christian by the Antisemitic tests in the Gosples? The ones that call Jews the sons of the Devil. How about blame for the mass murder during the Crusades, or the Inquisition. Are you to blame?
Stupid, stupid, stupid!
Jeffrey Levine
jeffrey@xemaps.com
Jeffrey Levine said:
ReplyDelete“Should we judge every modern Christian by the Antisemitic tests in the Gosples? The ones that call Jews the sons of the Devil.”
Scripture calls all humans, not just Jews, children of Satan in a sense (Ephesians 2:1-3). But John 8, the passage you seem to have in mind, is addressed to some religious leaders who opposed Jesus. Those leaders were Jewish, but it doesn’t therefore follow that Jesus was addressing all Jews and only Jews. Thus, if you’re going to argue that the Christian Bible is comparable to the church council Steve Hays cited, you’ll need to present another argument to that effect. The arguments you’ve presented so far are fallacious.
"Should we judge every modern Christian by the Antisemitic tests in the Gosples? The ones that call Jews the sons of the Devil."
ReplyDeleteActually, in the text, John 8:44, Jesus (a Jew himself) is directing his words at the *unbelieving* Jews who were planning on killing him (v.40). These Jews were differentiated from the *believing* Jews.
In fact, the term "son of hell" (Matt. 23:15) whose father is the devil (John 8:44) would apply to *all* unbelievers, not just Jews. Of course, unless you repent of your sins and your pseudo-righteousness, renounce the false religion of Rabbinism, and accept your Messiah of whom Moses and the Prophets spoke of, you too will be a son of hell whose father is the devil.
"...and do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham for our father'; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham." (Matthew 3:9)
Why did the Jews not accept their Messiah? It was for the same reason that their fathers killed the prophets and stoned those sent to them (Matthew 23:37).
"Stupid, stupid, stupid!"
Actually Jeff, Steve posted these quotes to show that Eastern Orthodoxy (a rival world-religion) is anti-semitic. Read the context of the posts more carefully. In the interest of charity, I will refrain from an obvious retort.
If this is anti-semitism, I suppose the biblical command to not to be yoked with unbelievers is as well. And when that biblical command is codifed in the Quintsext canons, suddenly people are upset?
ReplyDeleteAnd what about anti Cretins?
Titus 1:12-13 One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons." This testimony is true.
Ouch.
The hypocrisy here is unbelievable, not to mention that Godwin's law says this is already lost.
orthodox said...
ReplyDelete"If this is anti-semitism, I suppose the biblical command to not to be yoked with unbelievers is as well. And when that biblical command is codifed in the Quintsext canons, suddenly people are upset?"
Classic acontextual prooftexting. In context, 2 Cor 6:14 has reference to heathen idolaters, not to Jews.
orthodox said:
ReplyDelete"If this is anti-semitism, I suppose the biblical command to not to be yoked with unbelievers is as well. And when that biblical command is codifed in the Quintsext canons, suddenly people are upset?"
Which Bible command is codified by the Quintsext canon? Where does the Bible prohibit having Jewish physicians? Or Jewish friends? Or eating unleavened bread? Or eating bread by Jewish bakers? Or sharing a locker-room with Jews?
In defending Quintsext, Orthodox confirms his iron-clad anti-Semitism.
How is eating matzot from a Jewish person the same as being unequally yoked?
ReplyDelete>Classic acontextual prooftexting. In context, 2 Cor
ReplyDelete>6:14 has reference to heathen idolaters, not to
>Jews.
I see no reason to limit the verse to Jews. Heathen are merely one category of unbeliever.
But let's run with that: Are you happy to be "anti-buddist" because they are idolators? You're perfectly happy with that, but anti-Jewish is no good?
This is just hypocrisy, pure and simple.
>Which Bible command is codified by the
>Quintsext canon? Where does the Bible prohibit
>having Jewish physicians? Or Jewish friends? Or
>eating unleavened bread? Or eating bread by
>Jewish bakers? Or sharing a locker-room with
>Jews?
Apparently you have no problem ignoring Paul's advice and having no discernment between believers and unbelievers, and what's more you have a problem accepting some good advice from the church and from your elders on where to draw the line in being bound with unbelievers. Go ahead then and ignore the bible, that's your choice.
orthodox said:
ReplyDelete"This is just hypocrisy, pure and simple."
No, it's exegesis, pure and simple.
The Bible does not equate Jews and pagans.
And the apostles associated with Jews on a regular basis, attending the Temple services, &c.
You're also ducking the specifics of the canon. Would you refuse to have a Jewish physician? Would you refuse to share a locker room with a Jew? Would you refuse to ever eat at a Jewish deli?
Look, it's perfectly simple. We Eastern Orthodox aren't allowed to bathe with the Jews because we may be *contaminated with their uncleanliness*. I fail to see anything anti-Semitic about that.
ReplyDelete>You're also ducking the specifics of the canon.
ReplyDelete>Would you refuse to have a Jewish physician? Would
>you refuse to share a locker room with a Jew? Would
>you refuse to ever eat at a Jewish deli?
As ever, no canon is to be taken in a legalistic way. I would discuss the question with my spiritual father. If he said to follow the canon, I would follow the canon. If he released me for my particular situation from following the canon, I am released.
orthodox said:
ReplyDelete>You're also ducking the specifics of the canon.
>Would you refuse to have a Jewish physician? Would
>you refuse to share a locker room with a Jew? Would
>you refuse to ever eat at a Jewish deli?
As ever, no canon is to be taken in a legalistic way. I would discuss the question with my spiritual father. If he said to follow the canon, I would follow the canon. If he released me for my particular situation from following the canon, I am released.
***************
Let's hope that Orthodox never suffers a stroke or heart attack or accident where he is at the mercy of a Jewish paramedic or attending physician at the ER.
What about blood transfusions? Would he accept a Jewish blood transfusion? Or would that corrupt his precious bodily fluids?
Do we need Jewish blood banks and Orthodox blood banks?
Perhaps Orthodox could have a driver’s license issued with a swastika so that a Jewish paramedic would keep his filthy paws off Orthodox. Anything is better than violating canon 11 .
ReplyDeleteI guess that if Michael Dukakis or Paul Tsongas had been elected president, we’d have segregating swimming pools for Jews and Gentiles.
ReplyDeleteYou're all immature children, and this has nothing to do with what the council said. If you don't like the biblical statement that light has nothing in common with darkness, a believer has nothing in common with an unbeliever, go become a liberal athiest preaching the joys of relative truth and how all religions are really the same.
ReplyDeleteorthodox said...
ReplyDelete"You're all immature children, and this has nothing to do with what the council said."
This is what the council said:
CANON XI.
"LET no one in the priestly order nor any layman eat the unleavened bread of the Jews, nor have any familiar intercourse with them, nor summon them in illness, nor receive medicines from them, nor bathe with them; but if anyone shall take in hand to do so, if he is a cleric, let him be deposed, but if a layman let him be cut off."
ASCIENT EPITOME OF CANON XI.
"Jewish unleavened bread is to be refused. Whoever even calls in Jews as physicians or bathes with them is to be deposed."
So, according to this, Orthodox is not allowed to have a Jewish physician.
I assume the original reference to bathing is to the public Roman baths.
Hence, applying this to modern times, we should have segregated lockers and swimming pools for Jews and Gentiles.
One can go straight down the list. It's an embarrassment to Orthodox, which is why he's throwing a temper tantrum.
"If you don't like the biblical statement that light has nothing in common with darkness."
So, according to Orthodox, light is to Christian as darkness is to Jew.
Every time he opens his mouth to defend his Orthodox faith against the charge of anti-Semitism, he confirms the charge.
He belongs to a Jew-baiting, Jew-hating denomination.
That is why he hates the Jewish canon of the OT.