OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 21, 2014, 04:16:29 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Protestants' View of Bible and Church  (Read 6183 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« on: September 29, 2007, 10:34:22 PM »

Today I had a thought occur to me about Protestants, the Bible, and the church.

Many Protestants view the Bible as the manual for the church.  However, they think the Bible is more important than the church.  Here's my reasoning.  Protestants believe God preserved the Bible.  In their minds. that means He kept an apostate church from tampering with the Bible that completely disagreed with it.  However, Protestants believe God didn't preserve the church.  This idea shows they believe the Bible is superior because they think God protected it instead of the church.

What do all of you think?
Logged
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,131



« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2007, 10:59:31 PM »

Refer Protestants to I Timothy 3: 15.  The translation in the NIV, though somewhat cunning in its word order, still says that the pillar of truth is the Church.  There is no alternative to Church in the passage.
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
DennyB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 228


Moving Toward Orthodoxy


« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2007, 09:00:33 PM »

Today I had a thought occur to me about Protestants, the Bible, and the church.

Many Protestants view the Bible as the manual for the church.  However, they think the Bible is more important than the church.  Here's my reasoning.  Protestants believe God preserved the Bible.  In their minds. that means He kept an apostate church from tampering with the Bible that completely disagreed with it.  However, Protestants believe God didn't preserve the church.  This idea shows they believe the Bible is superior because they think God protected it instead of the church.

What do all of you think?


2 Corinthians 3:6 "The Letter Killeth,but the Spirit giveth life" the Spirit breaths life within and through the Church,for which the scriptures speak,The Logos(Word of God) is alive within the life of Church,not the scriptures,they only testify of this. Great points.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2007, 09:01:22 PM by DennyB » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,652


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2007, 10:43:09 PM »

Today I had a thought occur to me about Protestants, the Bible, and the church.

Many Protestants view the Bible as the manual for the church.  However, they think the Bible is more important than the church.  Here's my reasoning.  Protestants believe God preserved the Bible.  In their minds. that means He kept an apostate church from tampering with the Bible that completely disagreed with it.  However, Protestants believe God didn't preserve the church.  This idea shows they believe the Bible is superior because they think God protected it instead of the church.

What do all of you think?

Have you read this article on our own web site by our resident author, David Wooten (a.k.a. DavidBryan)?

The Unbiblical Doctrine of Sola scriptura
Logged
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2007, 11:50:18 PM »

Liberal protestants ironically probably have a larger respect for the church as an institution than conservative evangelicals, generally speaking.

Their problem, however, is that since they believe in developing doctrine and new revelations by the spirit to the church they end up in all kinds of messes theologically.

For evangelicals, the "invisible" church made up of all who know Jesus as their personal savior, regardless of denomination, is more important than the church as an institution or ecclesiastical body.

That dis-satisfying choice I think is one of the reasons so many of us former evangelicals have become Orthodox or RC in the past 20 years.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2007, 11:51:34 PM by BrotherAidan » Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2007, 11:54:08 PM »

Liberal protestants ironically probably have a larger respect for the church as an institution than conservative evangelicals, generally speaking.

Their problem, however, is that since they believe in developing doctrine and new revelations by the spirit to the church they end up in all kinds of messes theologically.

For evangelicals, the "invisible" church made up of all who know Jesus as their personal savior, regardless of denomination, is more important than the church as an institution or ecclesiastical body.

That dis-satisfying choice I think is one of the reasons so many of us former evangelicals have become Orthodox or RC in the past 20 years.

Indeed. I think Evangelicalism is a halfway house on the way to Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

I just love so many of them. They have their hearts in the right place. They understand the need for radical, personal conversion. And once you are converted to Christ, and the door of your heart and soul is thrown wide open for the Holy Ghost, where do you go from there? His Church.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2007, 11:56:26 PM by lubeltri » Logged
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2007, 11:54:38 PM »

Interestingly, after 5 years into this Orthodox journey, I begin to have trouble remembering how it was to think that way. I'm getting to the point where I "just don't get it " anymore with regard to protestants and evangelicals.

I hope that is a good thing in terms of my journey.
Logged
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2007, 11:56:05 PM »

Indeed. I think Evangelicalism is a halfway house on the way to Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

I just love so many of them. They have their hearts in the right place.

they might, but I just can't go back there anymore.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2007, 11:58:29 PM »

they might, but I just can't go back there anymore.

I wasn't finished yet Wink

No, you've grown and moved on from that stage of your spiritual journey.

I went through an Evangelical period myself. I wouldn't be in the Church now if not for that experience. It was a stepping stone.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2007, 11:59:14 PM by lubeltri » Logged
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #9 on: October 01, 2007, 12:06:42 AM »

I wasn't finished yet Wink

No, you've grown and moved on from that stage of your spiritual journey.

I went through an Evangelical period myself. I wouldn't be in the Church now if not for that experience. It was a stepping stone.

Yes, I agree!
Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2007, 12:24:41 AM »

Have you read this article on our own web site by our resident author, David Wooten (a.k.a. DavidBryan)?

The Unbiblical Doctrine of Sola scriptura

"Resident author," huh?  You're very kind.

I think that, in the words of the "Our Life in Christ" guys, the problem isn't that RCs and Orthodox have "too low a view" of Scripture (as Evangelicals will often accuse) but rather that Evangelicals have too low a view of the Church.  I think that sums up my opinion in a nutshell.

I think Evangelicalism is a halfway house on the way to Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

I just love so many of them. They have their hearts in the right place. They understand the need for radical, personal conversion. And once you are converted to Christ, and the door of your heart and soul is thrown wide open for the Holy Ghost, where do you go from there? His Church.

I went through an Evangelical period myself. I wouldn't be in the Church now if not for that experience.

See, but here's my thing -- and I was just talking about this this afternoon at coffee hour...hang on just a second...

<soapbox>

...OK...

It is a VERY dangerous thing to depend on Evangelicalism to provide us with our means of "getting a vision" for Jesus Christ...for "radical, personal conversion," for "throwing your heart wide open for the Holy Ghost" and all that...we are the Church; this experience should not only be a part of our life in Christ, but it should be the hallmark of it, as well.

The key to all of this is transparency, imo.  As Fr. Tom Hopko is fond of saying, the vestments aren't about the vestments; they're about God.  The icons aren't about the icons; they're about God.  The chant, the history, the canons, the rubrics, the incense and liturgical trappings -- NONE of this is an end to itself; NONE of it is about any past era, any time when men trusted in chariots or horses or emperors or czars, any particular language or lifestyle, or any conservative stance on any social or political issue.  It's not even about having all of your theological ducks in a row so you can write lengthy articles for the OC.net article section.

Until we get to the place where we are adamant about instilling a vision--in and among ourselves!--that is centered on nothing more and nothing less than the following, we will not be what we're called to be:

Quote from: St. Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, Ch 15
For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures...and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep...And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man...For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written:
           “Death is swallowed up in victory.”
           “ O Death, where is your sting?
             O Hades, where is your victory?”

Until we come to see the above as the point of why we come together every Sunday morning/Wed. night/Sat. night -- and are active in our living this out outside of those times (not to mention bringing people in to begin to experience it) -- we'll continue to see those who denigrate the Church still surpass us in zeal and desire for God -- a zeal not according to knowledge, but when one considers that the alternative often even lacks that zeal, well...</soapbox>
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2007, 09:04:10 AM »

Have you read this article on our own web site by our resident author, David Wooten (a.k.a. DavidBryan)?

The Unbiblical Doctrine of Sola scriptura
No, I hadn't read this article, but I just did.  I only frequent the forum.
Logged
aserb
asinner
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Self Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese
Posts: 1,188


« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2007, 09:32:08 AM »

If I may:

Many non-Orthodox see all the vestments/icons/insence, etc. as blocking the way to God or as an quaint, but outdated pageantry. Many evangelicals want something new or American for that matter. Many former evangelicals on this site, I assume, thought through all of this and regardless came to conclude that,warts and all, the at Orthodoxy is the church. Some people will never covert or as one said leave the way station. Additionally, many cradle Orthodox could give a stewed fig as to whether new members join or not. Orthodox were not trained to evangelize in the past decades. Many will even applaud evangelicals or at least say ".... well, they have their way of worship and we have ours ... it's the same God."  Many of the non-evangelicals on this site are a rare breed to come to Orthodoxy and as a result express their shock at cradle Orthodox lack of "zeal" shall we say.
Logged

Save us o' Son of God, who art risen from the dead, as we sing to thee Alleluia!
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #13 on: October 01, 2007, 10:18:19 AM »

Putting on my "liberal" hat for a moment.....

One should remember the historical context of Protestantism: a perception that the Catholic church, by the late middle ages, had elaborated upon scripture to produce doctrines and practices (exemplified by the sale of plenary indulgences) which were corrupt Sola scriptura originated as an attempt to roll back these "innovations". Of course, to a greater or lesser degree they failed, because they increasingly thought they could do without tradition, and they couldn't.

On the other hand, the defense that is being mounted here is totally inadequate. For this, we do need historical context. Let's go to the pharisees, to whom the systems of modern Orthodox Judaism can largely be traced. Their crucial doctrinal feature is one they share with Orthodoxy (and Catholicism, while I'm at it): elevation of a body of commentary into law. That's essentially what we have in the "infallible" canons of the church: a second body of scripture. And all the scriptural imprecations against "the letter" can be taken to apply against those canons.

Switching to my Canterbury cap.....

The division between scripture and other church writings reflects the former's importance as a record of the old covenant and most importantly as a record of the words of Jesus and the apostles. If one is inclined to believe that the church-- or rather, one's church-- is infallible, then of course there can be no point in talking about proper means of interpretation, because whatever is done is ipso facto proper. If one does not, then one must take up the issue of how to deal with the various writings in the context of the church of the present; and since the church makes a distinction between scripture and other writings, it is reasonable to respect that distinction here.

In the end, the meta-lesson is that we don't have dichotomous principles, but rather two extremes on a scale, both of which are brought up against the problem that interpretation must continue.
Logged
aserb
asinner
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Self Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese
Posts: 1,188


« Reply #14 on: October 01, 2007, 11:37:42 AM »

Furthermore:

Many people period do not choose a church based on theology. ME and Jesus is simple enough for a child to understand. Churches are often selected on "Feel". Was the worship exciting, was there a stirring message, is there something for the children, was parking convenient and adequate.

Choosing your church based on theological under pinnings is not common.

For some I am not telling you anything new.
Logged

Save us o' Son of God, who art risen from the dead, as we sing to thee Alleluia!
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #15 on: October 01, 2007, 01:09:02 PM »

Today I had a thought occur to me about Protestants, the Bible, and the church.

Many Protestants view the Bible as the manual for the church.  However, they think the Bible is more important than the church.  Here's my reasoning.  Protestants believe God preserved the Bible.  In their minds. that means He kept an apostate church from tampering with the Bible that completely disagreed with it.  However, Protestants believe God didn't preserve the church.  This idea shows they believe the Bible is superior because they think God protected it instead of the church.

What do all of you think?


Hmmm.....I think that Protestants believe God preserved the Church. they do not believe that He preserved Church unity. I think that because they obviously lack church unity, they center around the Bible because that is the only thing they have in common, even though they manage to pull all sorts of contradictory doctrinal positions out of it.

To cite a specific example, in the article on his journey to Orthodoxy, Clark Carlton describes in detail the Baptist doctrine of individualism, how nothing, not even Truth, should stand in the way of what and how to believe. Extreme yes, but it speaks to how the Evangelical mindset works.

Of course I love to sit in a ecumenical chat room, and every one laments the disunity of the "Church of Believers" and I say "but that wouldn't a problem if there was One, Holy, and Apostolic Church...." and they all agree with me.  Roll Eyes

Of course many of them also think that the thousands of denominations and "churches" are needed because........who knows who is right and wrong?? :p
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2007, 01:58:52 PM »

Many non-Orthodox see all the vestments/icons/insence, etc. as blocking the way to God or as an quaint, but outdated pageantry.

True.  And that can't really be helped, to a degree.  But the fact that we ourselves are often ignorant of what they *are* there for doesn't help us remedy the situation and at least give them one less reason to see them as such... 

Many former evangelicals on this site, I assume, thought through all of this and regardless came to conclude that,warts and all, the at Orthodoxy is the church.

"Take the wrapping with the package" is what I thought -- now I see that it's just peeling back layers and levels of significance as you go...

Orthodox were not trained to evangelize in the past decades.

Which is slowly changing out of the necessity brought on by no longer being a state-sponsored Church over here, and a rediscovery of who we are as the Church.

Choosing your church based on theological under pinnings is not common.

Sadly, you're right -- we're a rare breed.  Part of our mission DOES need to be a recovery of service through logistics -- good preaching/singing; ministry to children; warm, welcoming atmosphere, etc., so that folks who are MORE interested in community than doctrine can be a part of the group, too.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 01, 2007, 02:15:22 PM »

On the other hand, the defense that is being mounted here is totally inadequate. For this, we do need historical context. Let's go to the pharisees, to whom the systems of modern Orthodox Judaism can largely be traced. Their crucial doctrinal feature is one they share with Orthodoxy (and Catholicism, while I'm at it): elevation of a body of commentary into law.

If I could, sir--and let me see if I'm hearing you correctly--would it be fair to say that both groups (Orthodox Jews and Orthodox/Roman Catholic Christians) both hold to a certain interpretive norm as being an imperative of the Faith?  Wouldn't this simply be a case of Tradition being "Scripture rightly interpreted" and lived out?

Sorry if I've misheard you...it simply seems like (to use my above citation from St. Paul) practices and beliefs either are or are not products of proper, organic growth from the word of the Gospel...either that, or said praxis and belief is so far removed in reality (even if it is proper) from the Gospel message that it's lost its raison d'etre...

In the end, the meta-lesson is that we don't have dichotomous principles, but rather two extremes on a scale, both of which are brought up against the problem that interpretation must continue.

Indeed: the question then becomes whether or not there is any way to know if interpretation of certain things has been settled.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #18 on: October 01, 2007, 03:56:13 PM »

If I could, sir--and let me see if I'm hearing you correctly--would it be fair to say that both groups (Orthodox Jews and Orthodox/Roman Catholic Christians) both hold to a certain interpretive norm as being an imperative of the Faith?  Wouldn't this simply be a case of Tradition being "Scripture rightly interpreted" and lived out?

Well, I don't know about "lived out"; we're talking about documents here, not the way in which individual Christians exemplify them. And as far as "interpreted" is concerned, the issue is that the patristic works also have to be interpreted. We can take the issue of whether converts can be received through chrismation or must be rebaptized. Scripture proper doesn't give a definite answer, so you turn to the church fathers; but the fact that this reference has led to a difference of opinion indicates that interpretation is going on. It isn't that this interpretation is going on, though, that is the crux of the matter, but rather that the fathers are being consulted as a definitive reference, as infallible as the Bible. That's the way the Talmud is consulted in Orthodox Judaism: as if it were as binding as Torah.

Quote
Sorry if I've misheard you...it simply seems like (to use my above citation from St. Paul) practices and beliefs either are or are not products of proper, organic growth from the word of the Gospel...either that, or said praxis and belief is so far removed in reality (even if it is proper) from the Gospel message that it's lost its raison d'etre...

I don't see it as that sort of dichotomy. When one talks about "organic" development (which is a bit of a problem word anyway, but let that pass), one should observe in nature that "organic" does not imply "proper". If one gives up that dogma, one can at least postulate development of doctrine which is natural but nonetheless flawed. And if one accepts that the developers of doctrine are in fact still sinners, one has a mechanism by which such natural-but-wrong development can be introduced.

Quote
Indeed: the question then becomes whether or not there is any way to know if interpretation of certain things has been settled.

Well, one can certainly take as settled any point that isn't seeing significant argument. Trinitarian dogma, for instance, sees no serious opposition. Of course, one can always find someone willing to argue any given point, but if they conspicuously stand outside any consensus, then they can generally be ignored. For instance, nobody should take Jack Spong as an indication that the Episcopal Church has abadonded the Nicene Creed. He should have been disciplined; but you'ld be hard pressed to find anyone who supports his more radical statements-- certainly among the bishops, if to a lesser extent among the rest of the clergy.
Logged
Didymus
Peace and grace.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: HG Coptic Bishop Anba Daniel of Sydney
Posts: 563


St. Thomas Didymus the Apostle of India


« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2007, 10:25:12 AM »

The consensus would seem to be...

Protestants are wrong Cheesy
Logged

...because I was not with you when the Lord came aforetime.
...because I am blind and yet I see.
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2007, 07:41:28 PM »

Hmmm.....I think that Protestants believe God preserved the Church. they do not believe that He preserved Church unity. I think that because they obviously lack church unity, they center around the Bible because that is the only thing they have in common, even though they manage to pull all sorts of contradictory doctrinal positions out of it.

To cite a specific example, in the article on his journey to Orthodoxy, Clark Carlton describes in detail the Baptist doctrine of individualism, how nothing, not even Truth, should stand in the way of what and how to believe. Extreme yes, but it speaks to how the Evangelical mindset works.

Of course I love to sit in a ecumenical chat room, and every one laments the disunity of the "Church of Believers" and I say "but that wouldn't a problem if there was One, Holy, and Apostolic Church...." and they all agree with me.  Roll Eyes

Of course many of them also think that the thousands of denominations and "churches" are needed because........who knows who is right and wrong?? :p

I was Protestant until a couple years ago and I can guarantee you that some Protestants think the church didn't exist for over a 1000 years.  Some others believe she did exist but she didn't leave any historical record.
Logged
Ian Lazarus
The Main Man!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: AOA
Posts: 1,545


yIjah, Qey' 'oH!


« Reply #21 on: October 04, 2007, 08:05:30 PM »

Quote
The consensus would seem to be...

Protestants are wrong


Aint dat da trut!
Logged

"For I am With thee, withersoever thou goest"

Joshua 1:9
Didymus
Peace and grace.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: HG Coptic Bishop Anba Daniel of Sydney
Posts: 563


St. Thomas Didymus the Apostle of India


« Reply #22 on: October 05, 2007, 12:48:05 PM »

Some Protestants believe that the statement Christ made about the gates of hell/hades not prevailing against His Church meant that no true Christian (ie any of the predestined) could ever lose salvation rather than interpreting the verse to indicate a specific visable, ever present entity.

Most Protestants can't tell you why they believe the Holy Bible is the Word of God or why they believe it should be the sole authority on matters of faith and worship either.
Logged

...because I was not with you when the Lord came aforetime.
...because I am blind and yet I see.
aserb
asinner
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Self Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese
Posts: 1,188


« Reply #23 on: October 05, 2007, 02:45:57 PM »

A hate to shock all of you - but most people can't tell you why they believe what they believe in. MOst Orthodox cannot tell you the purpose of or explain the Divine Liturgy or the prayers or why we use icons in our worship or whether we are venerating Mary or praying to her.

The point is - - I have found that most people do not "think" about their faith - Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim beyond the basics or in many cases people believe that - well that is what I was born into.
Logged

Save us o' Son of God, who art risen from the dead, as we sing to thee Alleluia!
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #24 on: October 05, 2007, 04:33:12 PM »


I was Protestant until a couple years ago and I can guarantee you that some Protestants think the church didn't exist for over a 1000 years.  Some others believe she did exist but she didn't leave any historical record.


Yeah, I've heard some horror stories re: doctrine coming out of Protestant seminaries, let alone the laity.
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,131



« Reply #25 on: October 07, 2007, 04:59:06 PM »

A hate to shock all of you - but most people can't tell you why they believe what they believe in. MOst Orthodox cannot tell you the purpose of or explain the Divine Liturgy or the prayers or why we use icons in our worship or whether we are venerating Mary or praying to her.

The point is - - I have found that most people do not "think" about their faith - Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim beyond the basics or in many cases people believe that - well that is what I was born into.

Too true, unfortunately.  Then there are those who simply keep the faith because it less something to be believed, but a part of your cultural heritage and to dismiss that one facet would mean to deny that you are Greek, Russian, Arabic, etc.  Then there are the converts, once they are received into the Church make no more attempts to grow in the faith, read the Fathers or even attend Divine Liturgy.  This phenomenon affects EVERYONE, cradle and convert alike.  There needs to be a greater emphasis on catechesis, effective catechesis, especially for the young.  But there are those who say that rigid catechesis amounts to a type of "legalism" and there is no way we can have that.  But, thank God in His mercy that my salvation is not dependent upon the faithfulness of each member of the flock.
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
aserb
asinner
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Self Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese
Posts: 1,188


« Reply #26 on: October 07, 2007, 07:41:17 PM »

Scam...
 Well you're one person that  I did not shock. You are so true.  Dan
Logged

Save us o' Son of God, who art risen from the dead, as we sing to thee Alleluia!
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #27 on: October 07, 2007, 09:49:45 PM »

Too true, unfortunately.  Then there are those who simply keep the faith because it less something to be believed, but a part of your cultural heritage and to dismiss that one facet would mean to deny that you are Greek, Russian, Arabic, etc. 

Yeah, it reminds me of My Big Fat Greek Wedding where the unbelieving guy gets baptized and says afterwards, "See honey, I'm Greek now!"

Logged
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #28 on: October 07, 2007, 11:49:56 PM »

Yeah, I've heard some horror stories re: doctrine coming out of Protestant seminaries, let alone the laity.

These must be the most extreme fundamentalist or pentecostal seminaries because I went to a Protestant seminary and have many friends who went to different ones than I graduated from. Every one of them required at least two semesters of Church History and none of those courses taught that the Church disappeared. Granted, they taught little or nothing about the Eastern Church, it was all Western Church history. Their view was that the Church was gravely ill at the time of the reformation and in need of what the reformers accomplished. But never that the Church had disappeared entirely.

When I discovered the Orthodox Church I realized how completely seminary courses focused only on Western history and the Great Schism was seen as some minor rift way back when because the real action occurred at the time of the reformation. As I learned all that great (Eastern Church) history, I was tempted to write the seminary requesting a partial refund for those courses!

But there are no horror stories and I could name half a dozen prominent evangelical and/or mainline denomiational seminaries.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2007, 11:52:17 PM by BrotherAidan » Logged
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #29 on: October 07, 2007, 11:57:22 PM »

A hate to shock all of you - but most people can't tell you why they believe what they believe in. MOst Orthodox cannot tell you the purpose of or explain the Divine Liturgy or the prayers or why we use icons in our worship or whether we are venerating Mary or praying to her.

The point is - - I have found that most people do not "think" about their faith - Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim beyond the basics or in many cases people believe that - well that is what I was born into.

On the flip side, the problem is that as soon as someone wants to learn about what they believe or become a little bit serious about their faith everyone in the Church wants to ordain you!

That was how I ended up at a protestant semiary and got ordained as a presbyterian minister, which I later demitted (rescinded) because it was a big mistake for me. When I was still an Orthodox catechumen, even the bishop's assistant (among many other well-meaning, misguided people) asked if I was going to be ordained a deacon! It was like, come on, give me a break!
« Last Edit: October 07, 2007, 11:59:39 PM by BrotherAidan » Logged
aserb
asinner
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Self Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese
Posts: 1,188


« Reply #30 on: October 08, 2007, 08:52:20 AM »

Bro Aidan:

After I came home to Orthodoxy . . . after a looooong abscence I too was asked this question.  Grin
Logged

Save us o' Son of God, who art risen from the dead, as we sing to thee Alleluia!
aserb
asinner
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Self Ruled Antiochian Archdiocese
Posts: 1,188


« Reply #31 on: October 08, 2007, 08:59:19 AM »

Hey:  Where did Halloween man go?
Logged

Save us o' Son of God, who art risen from the dead, as we sing to thee Alleluia!
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #32 on: October 08, 2007, 11:16:09 AM »

Quote
Hey:  Where did Halloween man go?

Trick o' treating perhaps?
Logged
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,131



« Reply #33 on: October 08, 2007, 01:25:06 PM »

Hey:  Where did Halloween man go?

Maybe visiting a Roman Catholic message board to espouse what he did here? 
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #34 on: October 08, 2007, 03:32:45 PM »

These must be the most extreme fundamentalist or pentecostal seminaries because I went to a Protestant seminary and have many friends who went to different ones than I graduated from. Every one of them required at least two semesters of Church History and none of those courses taught that the Church disappeared. Granted, they taught little or nothing about the Eastern Church, it was all Western Church history. Their view was that the Church was gravely ill at the time of the reformation and in need of what the reformers accomplished. But never that the Church had disappeared entirely.

It's not too surprising that prot. seminaries have often paid little attention to Eastern church history. They are, one expects, most interested in the history of their church. OTOH, if you take the viewpoint that you don't really need to consider their analyses (except to refute them), then you can hardly fault them for treating your church in the same cavalier manner. Discussions here have time and again shown that a lot of Orthodox know little more about Protestantism than the Protestants do about them-- except that protestants at least don't have to belabor as much under the elitist claptrap on reads in the newspapers.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2007, 04:26:26 PM by Keble » Logged
Leumas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15


« Reply #35 on: October 10, 2007, 10:02:18 AM »

I haven't read all the posts, so please point something out to me if you think it's relevant or if I've said something and you think it's wrong.

It's not too surprising that prot. seminaries have often paid little attention to Eastern church history. They are, one expects, most interested in the history of their church. OTOH, if you take the viewpoint that you don't really need to consider their analyses (except to refute them), then you can hardly fault them for treating your church in the same cavalier manner. Discussions here have time and again shown that a lot of Orthodox know little more about Protestantism than the Protestants do about them-- except that protestants at least don't have to belabor as much under the elitist claptrap on reads in the newspapers.

It's a shame that there's so little of Orthodox church history being taught and learnt. I forgot how I found out about the Orthodox church. I think it was this domed building with a cross symbol on top near where I live. Then I started to notice a few more around the city I live in.

At first I thought they were some kind of strange Islamic mosques (sorry!), then my dad decided to check one out and found out they were Greek Christians. He got really excited that there were these "different, but kinda cool" Christians that we didn't know about.

Years later I started to look for some information and found this forum, as well as a book. (I was going through other issues in the intervening years).

I think one thing I recall from reading the few posts here is that you think the Protestants do not have a correct view of the church, or that too much emphasis is placed on the Scriptures only. I don't recall the specifics, would one of you mind sharing a bit more about this view, as I think I am Protestant and would like to hear what you have to say (I say I think because ... I don't really know)?

Thanks.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2007, 10:04:46 AM by Leumas » Logged

What happens when everything is lying on the ground?
Do you pick up the pieces all around?
And if the world should fall apart hold onto what you know.
Take your chances turn around and go.
- "Chapter One" (Lifehouse)
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #36 on: October 18, 2007, 11:26:57 PM »

Leumas
if you surf around the archives of the convert page you can find alot of helpful answers to your questions

Cool story of how your dad found out about Orhtodox!
« Last Edit: October 18, 2007, 11:27:36 PM by BrotherAidan » Logged
Tags: Bible Protestant Christianity the Church 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.123 seconds with 65 queries.