Difference between revisions of "Talk:Theosis"
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:: At first I thought this "Church of the East" might be the Nestorians, but when I looked at the front page and noticed the bit about [http://church-of-the-east.org/sacred%20sensuality/sacred_sensuality.shtml "sacred sensuality"], I became much more suspicious. This group isn't even as Orthodox as the Nestorians. --[[User:ASDamick|Rdr. Andrew]] 19:47, 6 Apr 2005 (EDT) | :: At first I thought this "Church of the East" might be the Nestorians, but when I looked at the front page and noticed the bit about [http://church-of-the-east.org/sacred%20sensuality/sacred_sensuality.shtml "sacred sensuality"], I became much more suspicious. This group isn't even as Orthodox as the Nestorians. --[[User:ASDamick|Rdr. Andrew]] 19:47, 6 Apr 2005 (EDT) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ::: Oh dear, when I criticised the use of Yeshu, I didn't bother reading the article much as the English was so poor. If I had I wouldn't have bothered with such a minor point. I've actually come across this 'church' before via an online forum, whilst discussing Orthodoxy with a distinctly Gnostic person. They seem like a New Age group jumping on the Thomasite lineage in the East as an attempt to gain legitimacy. Even their grasp of Church history seems very poor. |
Revision as of 09:47, April 7, 2005
I don't think you ought to be using the term 'Yesu' here. You're writing in English and so Jesus would be more appropriate.James 08:56, 6 Apr 2005 (EDT)
- This article has a strange emphasis and cites not-Orthodox texts as Scripture. I'm removing it and replacing it with the Wikipedia article on Theosis, which itself will need some modification. The possible source of this material was [1]. Fr. John 15:23, 6 Apr 2005 (EDT)
- At first I thought this "Church of the East" might be the Nestorians, but when I looked at the front page and noticed the bit about "sacred sensuality", I became much more suspicious. This group isn't even as Orthodox as the Nestorians. --Rdr. Andrew 19:47, 6 Apr 2005 (EDT)
- Oh dear, when I criticised the use of Yeshu, I didn't bother reading the article much as the English was so poor. If I had I wouldn't have bothered with such a minor point. I've actually come across this 'church' before via an online forum, whilst discussing Orthodoxy with a distinctly Gnostic person. They seem like a New Age group jumping on the Thomasite lineage in the East as an attempt to gain legitimacy. Even their grasp of Church history seems very poor.