Author Topic: Re:Why Orthodox soteriology is gobbledygook to a Western Christian  (Read 1321 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Keble

  • All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,484
This message was clearly doomed to be moved anyway, so.....

The argument is laid out at the end of

http://orlapubs.com/AR/R266.html

I've looked at the page in question, and it is, at best, a disorganized mess. The only scripture quotation in it that I see which I can make much sense of is the Genesis one (the first reference-- the second reference to Genesis has the wrong verse number). I'll get back to that one. The others I can't make heads or tails of. The passage from 1 Peter doesn't use the word "theosis" or anything like it; it isn't explained what about the Phillipians passage would be read differently in East and West.

That takes us back to the word "eikona" in Genesis 1:26. I don't think it can be said that the Hebrew word behind this is read in a single way anywhere. There is a certain quality of mystery (in the theological sense) about this passage, because in Exodus the Israelites are told not to make images of God.

Which brings us back to St. Maximos. What I see in practice is that Orthodoxy is exactly like Catholicism in its tendency to slide into a precisely juridical view of what must be done to be saved. Bad Orthodoxy/Catholicism falls into saying that salvation is to be worked out through submission to the earthly church and obedience to its dictates. Once you step away from this sort of self-parody Christianity, the differences between East and West get a lot more blurry. It is true that the issue of superrogation has tended to swampt things at times (which is why there's so much effort in the Catholic Encyclopedia devoted to refuting Martin Luther). I don't have time now, conversely, to talk about the tendency in the East to talk about the Action of God as if i were a substance. (That discussion should be in the substantial grace discussion anyway.)

The main problem here is that the passage is itself nearly gobbledygook. It's not a very coherent exposition of anything.


Offline Oblio

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 454
  • The Pointless One !
    • St. Innocent Orthodox Church
Re:Why Orthodox soteriology is gobbledygook to a Western Christian
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2003, 08:31:21 AM »
Quote
The main problem here is that the passage is itself nearly gobbledygook. It's not a very coherent exposition of anything.

I had the same thought, Keble, though I did look to the possiblity of my BCC (Blood Caffeine Content) being a bit low when I looked at it.  It also got me to thinking that our online course in Greek would be nice to have.

Offline Linus7

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,780
Re:Why Orthodox soteriology is gobbledygook to a Western Christian
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2003, 12:25:42 PM »
Quote
From the article cited by Keble above: 2. In what respect is it important for what is important to be simple?

Well, if they had kept it simple, I might have understood it better!

I had a hard time following that article, so I am inclined to agree with Keble's declaration that it is "gobbledygook."

I don't think one example of poor or confusing writing means that the Orthodox doctrine of salvation is gobbledygook, however. That was just a badly written article.
The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas

Offline Oblio

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 454
  • The Pointless One !
    • St. Innocent Orthodox Church
Re:Why Orthodox soteriology is gobbledygook to a Western Christian
« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2003, 12:42:30 PM »
From m-w.com:

Main Entry: gob-+ble-+dy-+gook
Variant(s): also gob-+ble-+de-+gook  /'g+ñ-b&l-dE-"guk, -"g++k/
Function: noun
Etymology: irregular from gobble, n.
Date: 1944

wordy and generally unintelligible jargon



One has to wonder if it came out of the military  ;D