OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 04:40:26 AM *
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 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: An Orthodox opinion on Reformed Baptist Doctrine  (Read 5047 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
sprtslvr1973
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA; Jurisdiaction of Dallas and the South
Posts: 684


"Behold I stand at the Door and Knock" Rev. 3:20


« Reply #45 on: October 21, 2010, 02:25:49 PM »

I just have to point out, as I always must any time I see it, that it pains me that the first clause of their beliefs references the Scriptures. God, quite literally, comes second.

You have to understand the Protestant doctrine regarding this.  It is a common doctrine among Protestants (particularly Lutherans) that God manifests Himself through the Scriptures (or as they say it, through the Word).  It is not possible for man to know God except by what is revealed in the Scriptures.  Consequently, the Scriptures have the highest order of precedence because without them, we could not know God.  No Protestant who understands his doctrine would hold the Scriptures above God.  They do not worship the Scriptures, but worship only God.  They simply believe that knowing God is impossible without exposure to the "Word of God", either read in the Bible or read to them in Church.

Really?!  Wow!  I don't mean to be disrespectful towards Protestants, but that is the most bizarre belief.   Shocked

My mother told me once that Jesus spoke American.  Roll Eyes She's been going to church for 50 years and has never read the Bible.

Protestant Christianity in America is more of social club or Six Flags over Jesus. 

Uh OK. I guess there are no Orthodox churches that could be called Six Flags Over Athens or Beirut. Careful when you throw off-handed insults and accusations
Logged

"Into thy hands I commend my spirit"- Luke 23:46
“Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!” - Mark 9:24
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #46 on: October 21, 2010, 03:32:22 PM »

If it pains you so much to mention the name, either call them "Roman Catholic/Roman Catholic Church"  or RCC. You can claim neither of those names, and you have not overtly disrespected anyone.

Don't you get it? If I don't recognize your claim to be Catholic then neither "Catholic" nor "Roman Catholic" could possibly work.

I'm really not trying to be a !$#^ about this. I'm actually trying to help you. Because if you imagine all the lurkers who pass through this forum, looking for questions, who have never seen/spoken to an Oriental Orthodox or an Eastern Orthodox, but think they may agree with with said theology, you don't want to give them a bad impression. Especially, if said person is a Roman Catholic. For perspective, if you were an OO looking at becoming RC and you found a forum where the RCs couldn't mention the name Oriental Orthodox without spitting, do you think you'd feel very comfortable? It might give you a bad impression.

I think you are misinterpreting my feelings about this. I don't get upset in situations where I have to use the term Catholic to refer to your church (that is in a situation where I can't use any other term and make sense to the person).
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 03:32:37 PM by deusveritasest » Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #47 on: October 21, 2010, 03:33:53 PM »

Names are usually not empty. They have meanings behind them. "Catholics" call themselves Catholic because for them it indicates the claim that they are the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ. So what if I disagree with that assumption? Why should I assume the title that indicates the claim that I disagree with?
Why don't you just call us "The Latins"? It doesn't come with all the historical bagage of the term "Romanists".



But it has less room for inclusion of the Eastern riters.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #48 on: October 21, 2010, 03:34:56 PM »

Is the Pope not Catholic?  Grin

No, he's not.
You are right. Pope Shenouda is not Catholic, he's Oriental Orthodox.   laugh I Kid! I KID!. lol

Well, I guess it's only fair if you think HH is not Catholic.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #49 on: October 21, 2010, 03:51:58 PM »

If it pains you so much to mention the name, either call them "Roman Catholic/Roman Catholic Church"  or RCC. You can claim neither of those names, and you have not overtly disrespected anyone.

Don't you get it? If I don't recognize your claim to be Catholic then neither "Catholic" nor "Roman Catholic" could possibly work.

I'm really not trying to be a !$#^ about this. I'm actually trying to help you. Because if you imagine all the lurkers who pass through this forum, looking for questions, who have never seen/spoken to an Oriental Orthodox or an Eastern Orthodox, but think they may agree with with said theology, you don't want to give them a bad impression. Especially, if said person is a Roman Catholic. For perspective, if you were an OO looking at becoming RC and you found a forum where the RCs couldn't mention the name Oriental Orthodox without spitting, do you think you'd feel very comfortable? It might give you a bad impression.

I think you are misinterpreting my feelings about this. I don't get upset in situations where I have to use the term Catholic to refer to your church (that is in a situation where I can't use any other term and make sense to the person).

I'm not Catholic.

I have been talking to an Eastern Orthodox priest, as well as RCIA, but I am, as of yet, a "no-churcher".
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 03:53:16 PM by Azurestone » Logged


I'm going to need this.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #50 on: October 21, 2010, 04:01:59 PM »

If it pains you so much to mention the name, either call them "Roman Catholic/Roman Catholic Church"  or RCC. You can claim neither of those names, and you have not overtly disrespected anyone.

Don't you get it? If I don't recognize your claim to be Catholic then neither "Catholic" nor "Roman Catholic" could possibly work.

I'm really not trying to be a !$#^ about this. I'm actually trying to help you. Because if you imagine all the lurkers who pass through this forum, looking for questions, who have never seen/spoken to an Oriental Orthodox or an Eastern Orthodox, but think they may agree with with said theology, you don't want to give them a bad impression. Especially, if said person is a Roman Catholic. For perspective, if you were an OO looking at becoming RC and you found a forum where the RCs couldn't mention the name Oriental Orthodox without spitting, do you think you'd feel very comfortable? It might give you a bad impression.

I think you are misinterpreting my feelings about this. I don't get upset in situations where I have to use the term Catholic to refer to your church (that is in a situation where I can't use any other term and make sense to the person).

I'm not Catholic.

I have been talking to an Eastern Orthodox priest, as well as RCIA, but I am, as of yet, a "no-churcher".

Well, regardless I don't think my points were dependent on you being part of their church.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #51 on: October 21, 2010, 04:08:00 PM »

If it pains you so much to mention the name, either call them "Roman Catholic/Roman Catholic Church"  or RCC. You can claim neither of those names, and you have not overtly disrespected anyone.

Don't you get it? If I don't recognize your claim to be Catholic then neither "Catholic" nor "Roman Catholic" could possibly work.

I'm really not trying to be a !$#^ about this. I'm actually trying to help you. Because if you imagine all the lurkers who pass through this forum, looking for questions, who have never seen/spoken to an Oriental Orthodox or an Eastern Orthodox, but think they may agree with with said theology, you don't want to give them a bad impression. Especially, if said person is a Roman Catholic. For perspective, if you were an OO looking at becoming RC and you found a forum where the RCs couldn't mention the name Oriental Orthodox without spitting, do you think you'd feel very comfortable? It might give you a bad impression.

I think you are misinterpreting my feelings about this. I don't get upset in situations where I have to use the term Catholic to refer to your church (that is in a situation where I can't use any other term and make sense to the person).

I'm not Catholic.

I have been talking to an Eastern Orthodox priest, as well as RCIA, but I am, as of yet, a "no-churcher".

Well, regardless I don't think my points were dependent on you being part of their church.

Maybe not, but my point may make more sense to you. The image you convey, intentional or not, represents your party.

In the military, an officer is not allowed to attend political rallies or functions in uniform. Nor are they able to give personal opinions to news organizations. Why? Because people will represent their opinion with the entire armed forces. Same thing applies here.

That's why you'll see me criticize everyone here the same way. It's one thing to debate and discuss. It's another to drop the heretic hammer. You can do that, but you'll likely be loosing the war.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #52 on: October 21, 2010, 06:18:05 PM »

Names are usually not empty. They have meanings behind them. "Catholics" call themselves Catholic because for them it indicates the claim that they are the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ. So what if I disagree with that assumption? Why should I assume the title that indicates the claim that I disagree with?
Why don't you just call us "The Latins"? It doesn't come with all the historical bagage of the term "Romanists".



But it has less room for inclusion of the Eastern riters.
So the Byzantines are "Romanists" too. Wow. It's a just a trip down the rabbit hole with you.  Cheesy
\
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
mtgdude
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19



« Reply #53 on: October 21, 2010, 09:35:26 PM »

I just have to point out, as I always must any time I see it, that it pains me that the first clause of their beliefs references the Scriptures. God, quite literally, comes second.

You have to understand the Protestant doctrine regarding this.  It is a common doctrine among Protestants (particularly Lutherans) that God manifests Himself through the Scriptures (or as they say it, through the Word).  It is not possible for man to know God except by what is revealed in the Scriptures.  Consequently, the Scriptures have the highest order of precedence because without them, we could not know God.  No Protestant who understands his doctrine would hold the Scriptures above God.  They do not worship the Scriptures, but worship only God.  They simply believe that knowing God is impossible without exposure to the "Word of God", either read in the Bible or read to them in Church.

Really?!  Wow!  I don't mean to be disrespectful towards Protestants, but that is the most bizarre belief.   Shocked

My mother told me once that Jesus spoke American.  Roll Eyes She's been going to church for 50 years and has never read the Bible.

Protestant Christianity in America is more of social club or Six Flags over Jesus. 

Uh OK. I guess there are no Orthodox churches that could be called Six Flags Over Athens or Beirut. Careful when you throw off-handed insults and accusations

My friend I already said I was wrong for posting that comment.  I'll say again sorry for making that accusation. I'm not Orthodox, so I'll be silent and just read.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #54 on: October 22, 2010, 01:56:52 PM »

Names are usually not empty. They have meanings behind them. "Catholics" call themselves Catholic because for them it indicates the claim that they are the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ. So what if I disagree with that assumption? Why should I assume the title that indicates the claim that I disagree with?
Why don't you just call us "The Latins"? It doesn't come with all the historical bagage of the term "Romanists".



But it has less room for inclusion of the Eastern riters.
So the Byzantines are "Romanists" too. Wow. It's a just a trip down the rabbit hole with you.  Cheesy
\

When I say "Byzantines" I almost always mean the "Eastern Orthodox".

As to the Eastern riters, which I believe you had in mind in that post, yes, my definition I have provided for the term "Romanist" should have made it clear that they were included.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
David Young
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Baptist
Jurisdiction: local church, Wrexham, Wales
Posts: 1,847


2012, Presbyterian chapel, Nantyr


« Reply #55 on: October 24, 2010, 06:01:55 PM »

I don't think most Baptist churches teaches this doctrine anymore.

To bring the thread back to its original theme:

Reformed Baptists believe all the things you list. They were originally known as Particular Baptists, because they believe that Christ died not for all men, but for particular people (namely, the predestined elect). They trace their separate history to the 1630s.

General Baptists would, I think, subscribe to all the beliefs you list except the definition of election and the statement that it is impossible for someone who has been justified to be severed from Christ. They believe that Christ died for mankind in general (all men, not only the elect), hence the name "General". They trace their history to 1611.

Your words which I quote above are a matter of definition. If a church no longer teaches the historic Baptist beliefs, is it really Baptist, whatever it puts on its noticeboard? If you mean that a lot of churches with "Baptist" in their name no longer teach historic Baptist doctrine, you are probably right. Some are barely recognisable as Christian at all; others hold to the historic beliefs and practices.

In my personal view, the title "Reformed Baptist" is an oxymoron, as the Reformers believed in infant baptism, a State church, and the imposition of doctrine not only by persuasion of the mind and conscience but by the sword and the civil authorities. However, oxymoronic or not, it is the title chosen fairly recently by a lot of Particular (= Calvinistic) Baptists.

I also share the distaste expressed in one post for putting the Scriptures before even God himself. It seems a distorted structure for any religion to put a book - even an inspired book, even the inspired book - before the Inspirer thereof.

"If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?" (Psalm 11). As you will have gathered over the months, I for one take the name Baptist, and I believe I am genuinely such: though I have steadfastly refused to join the debates on various threads concerning the extent of the atonement or the possibility of losing salvation. Such debates (except perhaps with one's closest friends) seem always to lead to strife and dissension, from which may the good Lord deliver us all.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2010, 06:08:55 PM by David Young » Logged

"But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you are not consumed by one another." Galatians 5.15
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   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 0.077 seconds with 39 queries.