OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 25, 2014, 07:47:28 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 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: is sola scriptura Biblical?  (Read 4613 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Doubting Thomas
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 874

Anglican (but not Episcopagan)


« Reply #45 on: September 26, 2012, 03:23:42 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin
Logged

"My Lord and My God!"--Doubting Thomas, AD 33
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #46 on: September 26, 2012, 03:28:00 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

*kuch* 39 articles *kuch*
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
Doubting Thomas
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 874

Anglican (but not Episcopagan)


« Reply #47 on: September 26, 2012, 03:38:06 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

*kuch* 39 articles *kuch*

And?
Logged

"My Lord and My God!"--Doubting Thomas, AD 33
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #48 on: September 26, 2012, 03:39:04 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

*kuch* 39 articles *kuch*

And?

Ever read it?
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
Doubting Thomas
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 874

Anglican (but not Episcopagan)


« Reply #49 on: September 26, 2012, 04:20:43 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

*kuch* 39 articles *kuch*

And?

Ever read it?

Yep.
Logged

"My Lord and My God!"--Doubting Thomas, AD 33
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #50 on: September 26, 2012, 04:34:13 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

*kuch* 39 articles *kuch*

And?

Ever read it?

Yep.

They sound horribly protestant to me.
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #51 on: September 26, 2012, 04:36:28 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

Yes, noting special about you, guys.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Doubting Thomas
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 874

Anglican (but not Episcopagan)


« Reply #52 on: September 26, 2012, 04:59:11 PM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

*kuch* 39 articles *kuch*

And?

Ever read it?

Yep.

They sound horribly protestant to me.

Maybe.  But I guess it's sorta like interpreting Scripture--depending on who's reading it, it can sound obviously Catholic (or Orthodox) or Protestant (in a variety of flavors).  Within the wider context of the BCP and the ORDINAL, and the desire expressed in classical Anglican thought not to teach anything out of Scripture that's inconsistent with what the ancient catholic Doctors got out of the same, the Articles are certainly patent of a more catholic interpretation than some of it's detractors (or adherents for that matter) care to admit. 

As for Anglican Catholics in the Continuum, the Articles are indeed interepreted in light of the patristic consensus as is broadly stated in the Affirmation of St Louis (including 7 Councils and 7 sacraments)
Logged

"My Lord and My God!"--Doubting Thomas, AD 33
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #53 on: September 26, 2012, 05:04:57 PM »

This link is a strong Protestant defense of Sola Scriptura against Roman Catholicism. Since I see that the Eastern Orthodox are using similar arguments that are used by RC's here, I feel this link might provide a better insight into the Protestant defense of Sola Scriptura.

http://carm.org/bible-alone-sufficient-spiritual-truth

Please read the information in that link completely and write any comments in response to that link. I'd like to hear any feedback from the EO.


Quote
Since you are posting a protestant defence I am going to assume you are a part of protestant denomination group. Undecided

You may assume that, but I'm not a Protestant (I do not hold to all Protestant beliefs/ideologies except the five solas). I do not attend a Protestant Church. I'm just a Christian, a member of the Body of Christ.

What is the churchyou attend to worship with your fellow believers called?

Sorry I will try again...

What is the church you attend to worship with your fellow believers called?

I'm actually an Ex-Catholic, but I still attend the Catholic Church because I realized that no specific church organization is the Body of Christ. The Body of Christ is comprised of all who have placed their faith in Jesus's sacrifice on the Cross for salvation.
 This very sentence rings out as a Protestant and/or western atonement belief. Orthodoxy typically doesn't have the atonement as its central tenant in theology. Orthodoxy doesn't understand the cross as the satisfaction of a verdict of condemnation. There is no doctrine of Original Sin. True theology is a gift from god and comes later on. If you wish to put your faith into the Orthodox way. You must choose to live it first. That in itself is a leap of faith. You have to explore little variation that makes huge impacts of difference. First, we Orthodox vary because we call original sin Ancestral. If you really want to take some time out and read into what makes Orthodoxy different. You will have to systematically start from the beginning. With Adam an Eves fall all the way up to the Resurrection of Christ. The work is in your hands with the HS as your guide. You have to completely forget about what you were taught and start from scratch. You are comparing from a different prospective.
      I'll give you a quick example of the way it is. Lets say for instance you and a friend become lost in the woods. Than you both decide to go in different directions because you think the main road is north and he thinks it's south. BTW: did I mention that one of you is correct. I hope. While traveling through the woods from either perspective they both seem correct. This is important. Why? It's because while in travel both trails look identical. This is a comparative scenario of the state of our churches. The main road is the kingdom and the trails are the Churches. Since the Churches are still in route. There is no decisive winner. Yet.
   What we have to do is study and look at it from all angles to see for ourselves which trail is for us. The full kingdom is not upon us yet. The conclusive victor isn't realized yet. But the foundation is here.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #54 on: September 26, 2012, 05:51:10 PM »

The title of the thread is ingenious.
thanks, I deeply appreciate that
Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #55 on: September 26, 2012, 06:03:45 PM »

The Bible is a PART of Tradition itself. That it was canonized at a certain time (this differs depending on what particular church you are talking about; the Ethiopians have a much broader canon than most, reflecting the unique circumstances in which they received the Bible, whereas the RCs, by contrast, canonized their Bible definitively only in the 15th century or thereabouts, if my memory is correct at the Council of Trent, largely in response to Protestant tampering with the books), that certain books were not included, etc. All of this was decided in council. The Bible did not fall out of the sky one day, complete with table of contents and magical self-interpreting powers. If it were not for the Tradition that you so decry, you would have nothing on which to base your "Bible-believing" views, as the Bible as we know it would not exist. In fact, you and all Protestants should at least venerate St. Athanasius the Apostolic, who gave the first definitive shape to the New Testament canon such as you would recognize it today, in an festal letter in 367 AD. He said that these books were "canonized" (kanonizomena), and whether you are aware of it or not, you are following in the tradition of this great saint of the Church by using those same 27 books that he declared canonical all those centuries ago. You may read the letter in question today, even. Isn't it great that we have all this tradition that has been preserved so that you know where your Bible came from?  Wink
Amen
Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #56 on: September 26, 2012, 09:21:11 PM »

That will be too late. We need that important information now.

It's like saying. "We can accept the Gospel after we die, so it's not necessary now".

No it's about proclaiming the Gospel as the truth about God and how we relate to him, not trying to figure out who's going to hell so you can tell them all about how they're going to hell.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #57 on: September 26, 2012, 09:33:50 PM »

Is sola Scriptura biblical?

No, and I would go further-
Extra ecclesiam nulla scriptura.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,683


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #58 on: September 27, 2012, 01:19:57 AM »

The Protestants have no problem with councils.
well maybe not all protestants but a lot of protestants like Jehovah's witnesses don't agree with councils.  

You are mistaken, Jehovah's witnesses are not Christians. They are a non-Christian cult.
By what authority do you call them a non-Christian cult?

By the authority of the Church, the Body of Christ.
But if you're not a member of the Church, how can you cite the authority of the Church? Isn't that inconsistent?
Logged
jmbejdl
Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Church of Romania
Posts: 1,480


Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava


« Reply #59 on: September 27, 2012, 04:10:18 AM »

The Protestants have no problem with councils.
well maybe not all protestants but a lot of protestants like Jehovah's witnesses don't agree with councils.  

You are mistaken, Jehovah's witnesses are not Christians. They are a non-Christian cult.
By what authority do you call them a non-Christian cult?

By the authority of the Church, the Body of Christ.
But if you're not a member of the Church, how can you cite the authority of the Church? Isn't that inconsistent?

But he thinks he is a member of the Church - it's just that it's an invisible one made up of 'all believers', whatever that means. Of course if you have such a belief in what the Church is, invoking its authority does seem pretty pointless. After all, depending on your point of view you could use that justify anything from throwing out James to adding in the Gospel of Judas. Unless, of course, you're willing to admit that there is an actual visible Church whose Tradition is correct - but that invalidates the idea of an invisible church of all believers. It's that kind of realisation that drove me out of Protestantism myself.

James
Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #60 on: September 27, 2012, 08:24:26 AM »

Is sola Scriptura biblical?

No, and I would go further-
Extra ecclesiam nulla scriptura.

Perhaps this is true in a mystical sense, but as far as argument is concerned, it's only true in a trivial and useless sense: that only those who consider themselves within the church take scripture as an authority. Otherwise it simply begs the question.

Of course it is obvious upon a moment's thought that Protestants DO hold that scripture teaches sola scriptura. You don't have to look for the arguments to know this, though they are readily found if actually sought. It's pretty obvious, though, that as a fundamental doctrine, there would be Protestants attempting to justify it through scripture. Assuming that your opponents have no answer to the most obvious criticism is the worst sort of Colluphidism; there is much more integrity to be found in assuming that they have a response to that criticism, and that you have an obligation to seek out the highest quality response and answer it.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,488


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #61 on: September 27, 2012, 09:31:33 AM »

An argument I have used with the multitude of protestants in my area. Is sola scriptura true before, or after Luther removed books from the bible?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #62 on: September 27, 2012, 09:43:00 AM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.

This forum has "other Christian" section,

Michal, which denomination would you place in the "other Christian" Category?
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 09:58:38 AM by kx9 » Logged
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #63 on: September 27, 2012, 09:47:31 AM »

This link is a strong Protestant defense of Sola Scriptura against Roman Catholicism. Since I see that the Eastern Orthodox are using similar arguments that are used by RC's here, I feel this link might provide a better insight into the Protestant defense of Sola Scriptura.

http://carm.org/bible-alone-sufficient-spiritual-truth

Please read the information in that link completely and write any comments in response to that link. I'd like to hear any feedback from the EO.


Quote
Since you are posting a protestant defence I am going to assume you are a part of protestant denomination group. Undecided

You may assume that, but I'm not a Protestant (I do not hold to all Protestant beliefs/ideologies except the five solas). I do not attend a Protestant Church. I'm just a Christian, a member of the Body of Christ.

What is the churchyou attend to worship with your fellow believers called?

Sorry I will try again...

What is the church you attend to worship with your fellow believers called?

I'm actually an Ex-Catholic, but I still attend the Catholic Church because I realized that no specific church organization is the Body of Christ. The Body of Christ is comprised of all who have placed their faith in Jesus's sacrifice on the Cross for salvation.
 This very sentence rings out as a Protestant and/or western atonement belief. Orthodoxy typically doesn't have the atonement as its central tenant in theology. Orthodoxy doesn't understand the cross as the satisfaction of a verdict of condemnation. There is no doctrine of Original Sin. True theology is a gift from god and comes later on. If you wish to put your faith into the Orthodox way. You must choose to live it first. That in itself is a leap of faith. You have to explore little variation that makes huge impacts of difference. First, we Orthodox vary because we call original sin Ancestral. If you really want to take some time out and read into what makes Orthodoxy different. You will have to systematically start from the beginning. With Adam an Eves fall all the way up to the Resurrection of Christ. The work is in your hands with the HS as your guide. You have to completely forget about what you were taught and start from scratch. You are comparing from a different prospective.
      I'll give you a quick example of the way it is. Lets say for instance you and a friend become lost in the woods. Than you both decide to go in different directions because you think the main road is north and he thinks it's south. BTW: did I mention that one of you is correct. I hope. While traveling through the woods from either perspective they both seem correct. This is important. Why? It's because while in travel both trails look identical. This is a comparative scenario of the state of our churches. The main road is the kingdom and the trails are the Churches. Since the Churches are still in route. There is no decisive winner. Yet.
   What we have to do is study and look at it from all angles to see for ourselves which trail is for us. The full kingdom is not upon us yet. The conclusive victor isn't realized yet. But the foundation is here.

Regarding the part of your quote which I have boldened : Kindly make your answer clear : Does the Orthodox Church believe that faith in Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is not sufficient for salvation? (which means there is much more we must do to get salvation?)
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #64 on: September 27, 2012, 09:51:13 AM »

All existing Christian communities that cannot be categorized as Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, Catholics or Nestorians are Protestants for me.
Does this include Anglican Catholics?  Grin

*kuch* 39 articles *kuch*

And?

Ever read it?

Yep.

They sound horribly protestant to me.

Maybe.  But I guess it's sorta like interpreting Scripture--depending on who's reading it, it can sound obviously Catholic (or Orthodox) or Protestant (in a variety of flavors).  Within the wider context of the BCP and the ORDINAL, and the desire expressed in classical Anglican thought not to teach anything out of Scripture that's inconsistent with what the ancient catholic Doctors got out of the same, the Articles are certainly patent of a more catholic interpretation than some of it's detractors (or adherents for that matter) care to admit. 

As for Anglican Catholics in the Continuum, the Articles are indeed interepreted in light of the patristic consensus as is broadly stated in the Affirmation of St Louis (including 7 Councils and 7 sacraments)

I do know that it can be interpreted in a wide sense (I have read Tract 90) but it's rather unconvincing. Didn't the king who promulgated those articles added an edict to it in which he outlawed any interpretation but the most obvious and literal one?
This link is a strong Protestant defense of Sola Scriptura against Roman Catholicism. Since I see that the Eastern Orthodox are using similar arguments that are used by RC's here, I feel this link might provide a better insight into the Protestant defense of Sola Scriptura.

http://carm.org/bible-alone-sufficient-spiritual-truth

Please read the information in that link completely and write any comments in response to that link. I'd like to hear any feedback from the EO.


Quote
Since you are posting a protestant defence I am going to assume you are a part of protestant denomination group. Undecided

You may assume that, but I'm not a Protestant (I do not hold to all Protestant beliefs/ideologies except the five solas). I do not attend a Protestant Church. I'm just a Christian, a member of the Body of Christ.

What is the churchyou attend to worship with your fellow believers called?

Sorry I will try again...

What is the church you attend to worship with your fellow believers called?

I'm actually an Ex-Catholic, but I still attend the Catholic Church because I realized that no specific church organization is the Body of Christ. The Body of Christ is comprised of all who have placed their faith in Jesus's sacrifice on the Cross for salvation.
 This very sentence rings out as a Protestant and/or western atonement belief. Orthodoxy typically doesn't have the atonement as its central tenant in theology. Orthodoxy doesn't understand the cross as the satisfaction of a verdict of condemnation. There is no doctrine of Original Sin. True theology is a gift from god and comes later on. If you wish to put your faith into the Orthodox way. You must choose to live it first. That in itself is a leap of faith. You have to explore little variation that makes huge impacts of difference. First, we Orthodox vary because we call original sin Ancestral. If you really want to take some time out and read into what makes Orthodoxy different. You will have to systematically start from the beginning. With Adam an Eves fall all the way up to the Resurrection of Christ. The work is in your hands with the HS as your guide. You have to completely forget about what you were taught and start from scratch. You are comparing from a different prospective.
      I'll give you a quick example of the way it is. Lets say for instance you and a friend become lost in the woods. Than you both decide to go in different directions because you think the main road is north and he thinks it's south. BTW: did I mention that one of you is correct. I hope. While traveling through the woods from either perspective they both seem correct. This is important. Why? It's because while in travel both trails look identical. This is a comparative scenario of the state of our churches. The main road is the kingdom and the trails are the Churches. Since the Churches are still in route. There is no decisive winner. Yet.
   What we have to do is study and look at it from all angles to see for ourselves which trail is for us. The full kingdom is not upon us yet. The conclusive victor isn't realized yet. But the foundation is here.

Regarding the part of your quote which I have boldened : Kindly make your answer clear : Does the Orthodox Church believe that faith in Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is not sufficient for salvation? (which means there is much more we must do to get salvation?)

I suggest you read St. Athanasius "On the Incarnation" before you debate the Orthodox about salvation. Just a bit of advice.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 09:57:10 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,488


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #65 on: September 27, 2012, 09:53:24 AM »

Quote
Kindly make your answer clear : Does the Orthodox Church believe that faith in Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is not sufficient for salvation?
Faith without works is dead Wink

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #66 on: September 27, 2012, 10:03:58 AM »

I suggest you read St. Athanasius "On the Incarnation" before you debate the Orthodox about salvation. Just a bit of advice.

Should I read this one?

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/history/ath-inc.htm

Should I read any other links in the [contents] section of that web page. Please specify the numbers also?
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #67 on: September 27, 2012, 10:07:42 AM »

I suggest you read St. Athanasius "On the Incarnation" before you debate the Orthodox about salvation. Just a bit of advice.

Should I read this one?

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/history/ath-inc.htm

Should I read any other links in the [contents] section of that web page. Please specify the numbers also?

Yes, it's that one. You can skip the introduction by C.S Lewis though. For the rest, read it all. It wouldn't take too long and it is very edifying.
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #68 on: September 27, 2012, 10:08:17 AM »

Quote
Kindly make your answer clear : Does the Orthodox Church believe that faith in Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is not sufficient for salvation?
Faith without works is dead Wink

PP

Agreed.

But do you agree that [faith alone] (the type of faith that generates good works) is sufficient to save?

If yes, then Sola Fide is 100% biblical.
Logged
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #69 on: September 27, 2012, 10:21:35 AM »

The Protestants have no problem with councils.
well maybe not all protestants but a lot of protestants like Jehovah's witnesses don't agree with councils.  

You are mistaken, Jehovah's witnesses are not Christians. They are a non-Christian cult.
By what authority do you call them a non-Christian cult?

By the authority of the Church, the Body of Christ.
But if you're not a member of the Church, how can you cite the authority of the Church? Isn't that inconsistent?

This happens when one believes that the EOC [alone] is the true, and fullness of the Body of Christ.

In contrast to this, the Bible says the Church is the Body of believers. There are many more outside the EOC (other denominations) who have truly accepted Jesus as Savior.

You know that there are many in the EOC who do not have true faith in Christ (dead faith). They attend the EOC simply because they were born into an EOC family. I've seen the same thing with Roman Catholics.

So is one a member of the Body of Christ just because he/she is in the EOC, or because he/she has true faith in Christ?


And lastly, it is [not my verdict] that the Jehovah's Witnesses are a cult. The same has been analyzed and proclaimed by Christians many years ago and is being spread through the Internet as a part of preventing people from unintentionally falling into the claws of the cults.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 10:26:40 AM by kx9 » Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #70 on: September 27, 2012, 10:31:00 AM »

Being a member of the Orthodox Church doesn't mean that you're guaranteed salvation.
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,488


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #71 on: September 27, 2012, 10:36:52 AM »

Quote
[faith alone]
No, and neither does scripture.

Quote
There are many more outside the EOC (other denominations) who have truly accepted Jesus as Savior
I've no doubt that there are Christians outside the EOC. However, there is a visible Church with authority. Else why would the Apostles ordain people? Why would those that learned at their feet speak of this authority? There has to be a visible Church to protect correct belief. The idea that all of the 30,000+ denominations, which all believe radically different things are all the body of Christ is completely silly. God is not the author of confusion.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #72 on: September 27, 2012, 10:41:04 AM »

But do you agree that [faith alone] (the type of faith that generates good works) is sufficient to save?

If yes, then Sola Fide is 100% biblical.

Paul said that you can have that moves mountains and if you don't have love then it's nothing.

Truth faith brings about repentence, love of God, and love of neighbor. These things are expressed in the "works" that sola fide says "aren't necessary". Jesus said to love the Lord with "all" your heart, mind, sould, and strength. Anyway, saving faith is never alone.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,886



« Reply #73 on: September 27, 2012, 10:41:19 AM »

Quote
Kindly make your answer clear : Does the Orthodox Church believe that faith in Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is not sufficient for salvation?
Faith without works is dead Wink

PP

Agreed.

But do you agree that [faith alone] (the type of faith that generates good works) is sufficient to save?

If yes, then Sola Fide is 100% biblical.

You posit a tautology, therefore your argument is ultimately unconvincing or useless in practice. Let me ask instead how John 6:53 (see below) figures in your estimation of how and when salvation occurs?

"Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."

Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #74 on: September 27, 2012, 10:42:31 AM »

That will be too late. We need that important information now.

It's like saying. "We can accept the Gospel after we die, so it's not necessary now".

No it's about proclaiming the Gospel as the truth about God and how we relate to him, not trying to figure out who's going to hell so you can tell them all about how they're going to hell.

What I have boldened... is not the point.

Can I just get the answer to my question?
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,886



« Reply #75 on: September 27, 2012, 10:44:52 AM »

Sorry my friend but I have to get this straight...

You are an ex-catholic that believes in sola scripture but still attends the catholic church on Sundays because You have realised that no specific church organization is the Body of Christ. Huh

Lord have mercy.


There are many churches and also many non-christian cults who claim themselves to be the 'True Church" outside which there is no salvation.

For example, The RCC and the EOC make this claim.

Additionally the non-Christian Cults of Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses also make this claim.

Instead of listening to all these claims around us, we should look to the Bible which defines the Body of Christ - That is the Body of Believers. Additionally the Bible does not identify "which denomination" is the Body of Christ.

We don't make the claim that you attribute to us here. We know where the True Church but is we don't claim that it's impossible to be saved outside of Her. We simply entrust all those outside the Church to the God Who wishes all men to be saved. You seem to have misunderstood the Orthodox position on this as on many other things in your threads here. This often repeated quote from St. Theophan the Recluse seems to me to illustrate the Orthodox view perfectly:

"You ask, will the heterodox be saved... Why do you worry about them? They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins... I will tell you one thing, however: should you, being Orthodox and possessing the Truth in its fullness, betray Orthodoxy, and enter a different faith, you will lose your soul forever."

James
kx9--You did not directly respond to the above quotation of St. Theophan the Recluse, which leads me to ask if you are satisfied that this is indeed an Orthodox approach to the heterodox.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #76 on: September 27, 2012, 10:47:22 AM »

This happens when one believes that the EOC [alone] is the true, and fullness of the Body of Christ.

In contrast to this, the Bible says the Church is the Body of believers. There are many more outside the EOC (other denominations) who have truly accepted Jesus as Savior.

The trouble with this is that Orthodoxy is about much more than simple intellectual or emotional assent or agreement. James 2:19 reminds us that even the demons believe. That doesn't make them members of the Church.

Quote
So is one a member of the Body of Christ just because he/she is in the EOC, or because he/she has true faith in Christ?

Saying that the Orthodox Church is the Church is not the same as saying everyone who is Orthodox by virtue of their baptism has correct faith, is living by that faith, is "saved"/going to heaven, etc. Not the same at all, in fact. You are not ever going to understand Orthodoxy, I'm afraid, until you get away from the Protestant "snap decision" view of Christianity. True faith in Christ is not something that is able to be separated from what you actually literally (physically and spiritually) do with your life. If I agree with all the doctrines of Christianity and say I have true faith, yet I do not enter into communion with the Church that has kept His commandments (cf. John 14:15), then I can't really fall back on my intellectual and emotional assent. Plenty of other groups claim such great respect and love for Orthodoxy while not practicing it. Anyone can claim whatever they want, including people who are "Orthodox" but don't live any differently than anybody else, unless it happens to be Christmas or Easter. That means exactly diddly squat. Orthodoxy is about the whole life, not a superficial Church affiliation or label you've affixed to yourself.

Quote
And lastly, it is [not my verdict] that the Jehovah's Witnesses are a cult. The same has been analyzed and proclaimed by Christians many years ago and is being spread through the Internet as a part of preventing people from unintentionally falling into the claws of the cults.

The point is that a person who does not submit himself to the authority of the Church therefore has no authority to judge others who are similarly outside of it, as he is. Yes, I don't think you'd find too many who would argue with you that the JW organization is not reflective of any strain of apostolic Christianity, but coming out of the mouth of a similarly heterodox person, it doesn't really mean much. Why do you think Christ commanded the demons to silence, when they knew He was the Christ? The source of authority matters, and so coming out of the mouths of demons the truth of His messiahship would sound like just another lie. Well, the same can be said for heterodox decrying the heterodoxy of their fellow heterodox. We do not follow whatever page that we can find on the internet to decide what to believe about a group. The heresies embraced by the JWs and others were dealt with by the early Church very capably and thoroughly. This is also why your own viewpoints are being challenged and rejected. We've been here before, and much greater men and women than any of us have ably refuted such doctrines.
Logged

kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #77 on: September 27, 2012, 10:48:59 AM »

Quote
Kindly make your answer clear : Does the Orthodox Church believe that faith in Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is not sufficient for salvation?
Faith without works is dead Wink

PP

Agreed.

But do you agree that [faith alone] (the type of faith that generates good works) is sufficient to save?

If yes, then Sola Fide is 100% biblical.

You posit a tautology, therefore your argument is ultimately unconvincing or useless in practice. Let me ask instead how John 6:53 (see below) figures in your estimation of how and when salvation occurs?

"Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."




Then what did Jesus mean when He explained to His disciples that the flesh counts for nothing?

John 6:63
The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.
Logged
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #78 on: September 27, 2012, 10:54:19 AM »

Sorry my friend but I have to get this straight...

You are an ex-catholic that believes in sola scripture but still attends the catholic church on Sundays because You have realised that no specific church organization is the Body of Christ. Huh

Lord have mercy.


There are many churches and also many non-christian cults who claim themselves to be the 'True Church" outside which there is no salvation.

For example, The RCC and the EOC make this claim.

Additionally the non-Christian Cults of Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses also make this claim.

Instead of listening to all these claims around us, we should look to the Bible which defines the Body of Christ - That is the Body of Believers. Additionally the Bible does not identify "which denomination" is the Body of Christ.

We don't make the claim that you attribute to us here. We know where the True Church but is we don't claim that it's impossible to be saved outside of Her. We simply entrust all those outside the Church to the God Who wishes all men to be saved. You seem to have misunderstood the Orthodox position on this as on many other things in your threads here. This often repeated quote from St. Theophan the Recluse seems to me to illustrate the Orthodox view perfectly:

"You ask, will the heterodox be saved... Why do you worry about them? They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins... I will tell you one thing, however: should you, being Orthodox and possessing the Truth in its fullness, betray Orthodoxy, and enter a different faith, you will lose your soul forever."

James
kx9--You did not directly respond to the above quotation of St. Theophan the Recluse, which leads me to ask if you are satisfied that this is indeed an Orthodox approach to the heterodox.
Oh, yes I missed that. I thought I'll answer it later, then later didn't notice it.

Yes I agree with that statement.

But what I have boldened there... if it means losing faith in Christ, then yes, the soul is lost (whether the person leaves the EOC for another denomination or remains in it).
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #79 on: September 27, 2012, 10:58:09 AM »


The point is that a person who does not submit himself to the authority of the Church therefore has no authority to judge others who are similarly outside of it, as he is. Yes, I don't think you'd find too many who would argue with you that the JW organization is not reflective of any strain of apostolic Christianity, but coming out of the mouth of a similarly heterodox person, it doesn't really mean much. Why do you think Christ commanded the demons to silence, when they knew He was the Christ? The source of authority matters, and so coming out of the mouths of demons the truth of His messiahship would sound like just another lie. Well, the same can be said for heterodox decrying the heterodoxy of their fellow heterodox. We do not follow whatever page that we can find on the internet to decide what to believe about a group. The heresies embraced by the JWs and others were dealt with by the early Church very capably and thoroughly. This is also why your own viewpoints are being challenged and rejected. We've been here before, and much greater men and women than any of us have ably refuted such doctrines.

Didn't HH Pope Shenouda III write a book on how the JW are an heretical cult?

« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 11:13:13 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
jmbejdl
Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Church of Romania
Posts: 1,480


Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava


« Reply #80 on: September 27, 2012, 11:03:08 AM »

Sorry my friend but I have to get this straight...

You are an ex-catholic that believes in sola scripture but still attends the catholic church on Sundays because You have realised that no specific church organization is the Body of Christ. Huh

Lord have mercy.


There are many churches and also many non-christian cults who claim themselves to be the 'True Church" outside which there is no salvation.

For example, The RCC and the EOC make this claim.

Additionally the non-Christian Cults of Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses also make this claim.

Instead of listening to all these claims around us, we should look to the Bible which defines the Body of Christ - That is the Body of Believers. Additionally the Bible does not identify "which denomination" is the Body of Christ.

We don't make the claim that you attribute to us here. We know where the True Church but is we don't claim that it's impossible to be saved outside of Her. We simply entrust all those outside the Church to the God Who wishes all men to be saved. You seem to have misunderstood the Orthodox position on this as on many other things in your threads here. This often repeated quote from St. Theophan the Recluse seems to me to illustrate the Orthodox view perfectly:

"You ask, will the heterodox be saved... Why do you worry about them? They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins... I will tell you one thing, however: should you, being Orthodox and possessing the Truth in its fullness, betray Orthodoxy, and enter a different faith, you will lose your soul forever."

James
kx9--You did not directly respond to the above quotation of St. Theophan the Recluse, which leads me to ask if you are satisfied that this is indeed an Orthodox approach to the heterodox.
Oh, yes I missed that. I thought I'll answer it later, then later didn't notice it.

Yes I agree with that statement.

But what I have boldened there... if it means losing faith in Christ, then yes, the soul is lost (whether the person leaves the EOC for another denomination or remains in it).

Note that he says different faith, not different Church. I'd say it's quite possible to enter a different faith whilst nominally being a member of the Orthodox Church. I've met people (if you can use met re. the internet) who have appeared to have done exactly that.

James
Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #81 on: September 27, 2012, 11:10:09 AM »


The point is that a person who does not submit himself to the authority of the Church therefore has no authority to judge others who are similarly outside of it, as he is. Yes, I don't think you'd find too many who would argue with you that the JW organization is not reflective of any strain of apostolic Christianity, but coming out of the mouth of a similarly heterodox person, it doesn't really mean much. Why do you think Christ commanded the demons to silence, when they knew He was the Christ? The source of authority matters, and so coming out of the mouths of demons the truth of His messiahship would sound like just another lie. Well, the same can be said for heterodox decrying the heterodoxy of their fellow heterodox. We do not follow whatever page that we can find on the internet to decide what to believe about a group. The heresies embraced by the JWs and others were dealt with by the early Church very capably and thoroughly. This is also why your own viewpoints are being challenged and rejected. We've been here before, and much greater men and women than any of us have ably refuted such doctrines.

Didn't HH Pope Shenouda III write a book on how the JW are an heretical cult?

I've never read it (most of HH's writings are very poorly translated into English, sadly, so I only have a few of his books), but it seems yes, he did.
Logged

kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #82 on: September 27, 2012, 11:10:36 AM »

Quote
[faith alone]

Quote
No, and neither does scripture.

There are many verses that say we are [justified by faith]. Since faith and works are contrasted in many verses below, we have no option, but to add [alone] to faith to separate it from works.


    Rom. 3:28-30, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one."
    Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness,"
    Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,"
    Rom. 9:30, "What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith."
    Rom. 10:4, "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes."
    Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."
    Gal. 2:16, "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."
    Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.
    Gal. 3:5-6, "Does He then, who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 6Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
    Gal. 3:24, "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith."
    Eph. 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. 9Not by works, lest any man should boast."
    Phil. 3:9, "and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith."

Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."

"for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law," (Rom. 3:28)

The verses above say that we are justified by faith If you add works as a requirement for salvation, then you aren't saved. A true saving faith generates good works, else it is dead faith.


Quote
There are many more outside the EOC (other denominations) who have truly accepted Jesus as Savior
Quote
I've no doubt that there are Christians outside the EOC. However, there is a visible Church with authority. Else why would the Apostles ordain people? Why would those that learned at their feet speak of this authority? There has to be a visible Church to protect correct belief. The idea that all of the 30,000+ denominations, which all believe radically different things are all the body of Christ is completely silly. God is not the author of confusion.

The difference between Protestant denominations is because of minor differences. E.g Pentecostalism split from other denominations over the issue of speaking in tongues....

They never split over essential doctrines of Christianity. They all confess that Jesus is God in Flesh and many other biblical doctrines. Minor disagreements cause splits (which I agree is very unfortunate). Even the Early Church Fathers disagreed with each other. So it is not common for Protestants to split. Again I agree that this is extremely unfortunate.

The Bible declares that any spirit who confesses that Jesus has come in the Flesh is from God and whoever denies this has the spirit of the antichrist.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 11:23:00 AM by kx9 » Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #83 on: September 27, 2012, 11:12:46 AM »


The point is that a person who does not submit himself to the authority of the Church therefore has no authority to judge others who are similarly outside of it, as he is. Yes, I don't think you'd find too many who would argue with you that the JW organization is not reflective of any strain of apostolic Christianity, but coming out of the mouth of a similarly heterodox person, it doesn't really mean much. Why do you think Christ commanded the demons to silence, when they knew He was the Christ? The source of authority matters, and so coming out of the mouths of demons the truth of His messiahship would sound like just another lie. Well, the same can be said for heterodox decrying the heterodoxy of their fellow heterodox. We do not follow whatever page that we can find on the internet to decide what to believe about a group. The heresies embraced by the JWs and others were dealt with by the early Church very capably and thoroughly. This is also why your own viewpoints are being challenged and rejected. We've been here before, and much greater men and women than any of us have ably refuted such doctrines.

Didn't HH Pope Shenouda III write a book on how the JW are an heretical cult?

I've never read it (most of HH's writings are very poorly translated into English, sadly, so I only have a few of his books), but it seems yes, he did.

Heh, I knew it! I read some of HH's books (he even made a quiz on the Bible, that one is great).

However, your attack on kx9 applies to me as well Sad
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 11:13:37 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #84 on: September 27, 2012, 11:14:22 AM »

There are many verses that say we are [justified by faith].

(Huge list of random verses with no context whatsoever)

Oooo, look out everybody, it looks like we're gearing up for a...

Logged

dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #85 on: September 27, 2012, 11:18:33 AM »


The point is that a person who does not submit himself to the authority of the Church therefore has no authority to judge others who are similarly outside of it, as he is. Yes, I don't think you'd find too many who would argue with you that the JW organization is not reflective of any strain of apostolic Christianity, but coming out of the mouth of a similarly heterodox person, it doesn't really mean much. Why do you think Christ commanded the demons to silence, when they knew He was the Christ? The source of authority matters, and so coming out of the mouths of demons the truth of His messiahship would sound like just another lie. Well, the same can be said for heterodox decrying the heterodoxy of their fellow heterodox. We do not follow whatever page that we can find on the internet to decide what to believe about a group. The heresies embraced by the JWs and others were dealt with by the early Church very capably and thoroughly. This is also why your own viewpoints are being challenged and rejected. We've been here before, and much greater men and women than any of us have ably refuted such doctrines.

Didn't HH Pope Shenouda III write a book on how the JW are an heretical cult?

I've never read it (most of HH's writings are very poorly translated into English, sadly, so I only have a few of his books), but it seems yes, he did.

Heh, I knew it! I read some of HH's books (he even made a quiz on the Bible, that one is great).

However, your attack on kx9 applies to me as well Sad

Attack? No, no, no, no. Please, my friend, I'm not meaning to attack anyone, only to point out that appealing to an authority that you do not recognize is kind of silly. And anyway, it does not apply to you. You are a catechumen, and by all evidence that I can see here and other places, doing quite well in that role. If kx9 were a catechumen as well, I would not have written what I wrote. There is a world of difference between someone who is seriously inquiring into the Church with the aim of converting and someone who is inquiring into the Church in order to try to make it fit into his own preconceived ideology or epistemology. One is good, as it leads to understanding and faith; the other...well, the other leads to threads like this one. Wink
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 11:19:07 AM by dzheremi » Logged

jmbejdl
Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Church of Romania
Posts: 1,480


Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava


« Reply #86 on: September 27, 2012, 11:19:03 AM »

The difference between Protestant denominations is because of minor differences. E.g Pentecostalism split from other denominations over the issue of speaking in tongues....

They never split over essential doctrines of Christianity. They all confess that Jesus is God in Flesh and many other biblical doctrines.

The Bible declares that any spirit who confesses that Jesus has come in the Flesh is from God and whoever denies this has the spirit of the antichrist.

So it seems, then, that you'd have no trouble considering a modalist (such as the Oneness Pentecostals) to be part of your body of all believers? Because they certainly don't share a faith with me and the difference is anything but minor.

The problem you're having since you started talking of Sola Fide in this thread is that to us the idea of separating faith and works is nonsense. The two are totally entwined, different sides of the same coin. And for all the quotes you cherry pick (and I'll note that you seem to be either misunderstanding them or failing to spot the frequent references to 'works of the Law') to prove your point, none of them disprove our view at all. On the other hand, there certainly are quotes that would appear to disprove Sola Fide - that's why Luther hated the epistle of James so much.

James
Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos
LBK
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,181


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #87 on: September 27, 2012, 11:21:17 AM »

Quote
The difference between Protestant denominations is because of minor differences. E.g Pentecostalism split from other denominations over the issue of speaking in tongues....

They never split over essential doctrines of Christianity. They all confess that Jesus is God in Flesh and many other biblical doctrines.

Completely and utterly untrue.

To give just one example: the nature and purpose of the Eucharist. A minor matter, or an essential doctrine? There are Protestants which hold that the bread and wine do become the true body and blood of Christ; there are Protestants which regard what is in the chalice as simply bread and wine, and that the sharing of the cup is merely a remembrance, a memorial, and not a sacrament; and there are Protestants who have done away with any form of communion.

They can't all be right.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 11:22:52 AM by LBK » Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,535


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #88 on: September 27, 2012, 11:26:31 AM »


The point is that a person who does not submit himself to the authority of the Church therefore has no authority to judge others who are similarly outside of it, as he is. Yes, I don't think you'd find too many who would argue with you that the JW organization is not reflective of any strain of apostolic Christianity, but coming out of the mouth of a similarly heterodox person, it doesn't really mean much. Why do you think Christ commanded the demons to silence, when they knew He was the Christ? The source of authority matters, and so coming out of the mouths of demons the truth of His messiahship would sound like just another lie. Well, the same can be said for heterodox decrying the heterodoxy of their fellow heterodox. We do not follow whatever page that we can find on the internet to decide what to believe about a group. The heresies embraced by the JWs and others were dealt with by the early Church very capably and thoroughly. This is also why your own viewpoints are being challenged and rejected. We've been here before, and much greater men and women than any of us have ably refuted such doctrines.

Didn't HH Pope Shenouda III write a book on how the JW are an heretical cult?

I've never read it (most of HH's writings are very poorly translated into English, sadly, so I only have a few of his books), but it seems yes, he did.

Heh, I knew it! I read some of HH's books (he even made a quiz on the Bible, that one is great).

However, your attack on kx9 applies to me as well Sad

Attack? No, no, no, no. Please, my friend, I'm not meaning to attack anyone, only to point out that appealing to an authority that you do not recognize is kind of silly. And anyway, it does not apply to you. You are a catechumen, and by all evidence that I can see here and other places, doing quite well in that role. If kx9 were a catechumen as well, I would not have written what I wrote. There is a world of difference between someone who is seriously inquiring into the Church with the aim of converting and someone who is inquiring into the Church in order to try to make it fit into his own preconceived ideology or epistemology. One is good, as it leads to understanding and faith; the other...well, the other leads to threads like this one. Wink

I suspected that, I was just kidding a little bit, no hard feelings.
Logged

"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin
is pride that apes humility."
-Samuel Coleridge
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #89 on: September 27, 2012, 11:34:02 AM »

The difference between Protestant denominations is because of minor differences. E.g Pentecostalism split from other denominations over the issue of speaking in tongues....

They never split over essential doctrines of Christianity. They all confess that Jesus is God in Flesh and many other biblical doctrines.

The Bible declares that any spirit who confesses that Jesus has come in the Flesh is from God and whoever denies this has the spirit of the antichrist.

Quote
So it seems, then, that you'd have no trouble considering a modalist (such as the Oneness Pentecostals) to be part of your body of all believers? Because they certainly don't share a faith with me and the difference is anything but minor.

It is very unfortunate that most people cannot differentiate between a non-Christian cult and a Christian church.

Note that Pentecostalism is within the scope of Christianity, but Oneness Pentecostalism is a cult. It can be confusing since both share a similar name. But you need to know which is which.

Quote
The problem you're having since you started talking of Sola Fide in this thread is that to us the idea of separating faith and works is nonsense. The two are totally entwined, different sides of the same coin.

This is my position, so I agree, both are on the same coin, but only one side of this coin is what save us.

I'm not merely separating faith and works. I'm separating them on the basis of what is a requirement for salvation. I hold to the faith alone doctrine...but still I see good works flowing from me because of my faith.

Quote
And for all the quotes you cherry pick (and I'll note that you seem to be either misunderstanding them or failing to spot the frequent references to 'works of the Law') to prove your point, none of them disprove our view at all. On the other hand, there certainly are quotes that would appear to disprove Sola Fide - that's why Luther hated the epistle of James so much.

I know Luther called the Epistle of James an Epistle of Straw.

However if you try to read James 2:24 the "correct" way, then we see James contradicting the above verses which say that we are justified by faith apart from works.

The truth is : James isn't teaching in that way, but he is teaching the comparison between true faith and dead faith.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2012, 11:36:16 AM by kx9 » Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  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 0.204 seconds with 74 queries.