OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 24, 2014, 12:54:04 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Do Orthodox Christian believe bible is 100% correct and no mistake?  (Read 2793 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 907


« on: October 21, 2012, 12:41:55 PM »

Do Orthodox Christian believe that bible is 100% correct and no mistake?
Logged
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2012, 01:05:02 PM »

What do you mean by "correct"? There are different traditions of understanding and reading the Bible. In my own church, the Coptic Orthodox Church, we tend toward metaphorical, not necessarily literal readings of the scriptures. This does not mean that the Bible is "false" at all...only that sometimes what we read in the text is not necessarily how the text has been understood in history. If you read the Early Church Fathers' commentaries on the scriptures, you'll see that there are many different opinions and understandings on any given passage, all without asking whether it's "true" or "false".

Logged

KBN1
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: EO
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 887



« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2012, 01:50:45 PM »

Yes, it is correct for the purpose it was intended for. 
Logged
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 907


« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2012, 01:52:15 PM »

Yes, it is correct for the purpose it was intended for. 

Whst is the purpose the bible was inteneded for?
Logged
KBN1
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: EO
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 887



« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2012, 02:16:23 PM »

Yes, it is correct for the purpose it was intended for. 

Whst is the purpose the bible was inteneded for?

I think that needs to be answered on a book to book basis.  While Genesis is correct, the point of the first two chapters is not to be scientific about the exact origins of the cosmos.  Likewise, when details differ in accounts in the gospels, that doesn't change the truth of the accounts.  Now if you are asking if the Orthodox believe that every single detail of history is exact and perfectly correct according to the historical record, that is something entirely different.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,959


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2012, 02:32:35 PM »

Yes, it is correct for the purpose it was intended for. 

Whst is the purpose the bible was inteneded for?

For our enlighenment. Scripture is part of holy tradition which was written down. It also teaches us about God.

Some people try to use it as a textbook for everything or as a magical book that will tell them what to do in any situation specifically. Scripture first of all is a collection of writings (and there are several versions of these writings in the original languages). Second, it is the written experience of God, written by the Church--both Old and New Israel. It is inspired by the Holy Spirit, but one would be going beyond oneself to say it was dictated by the Holy Spirit word for word. It is a product of synergy--the cooperation of men with God.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
psalm110
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christianity
Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Posts: 369


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2012, 11:12:31 PM »

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,46774.0.html

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,4470.0.html

Here a two links, one's on the NT and the other the OT.


Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2012, 11:52:02 PM »

St. John of Kronstadt, My Life in Christ, p. 70:
When you doubt the truth of any person or event described in Holy Scripture, then remember that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” as the Apostle says and is therefore true, and does not contain any imaginary persons, fables, and tales, although it includes parables, which everyone can see are not true narratives, but are written in figurative language. The whole of the word of God is single, entire, indivisible truth; and if you admit that any narrative, sentence, or word is untrue, then you sin against the truth of the whole of Holy Scripture and its primordial truth, which is God Himself. “I am the truth,” said the Lord; “Thy word is truth,” said Jesus Christ to God the Father. Thus, consider the whole of the Holy Scripture as truth; everything that is said in it has either taken place or takes place.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2012, 12:14:28 AM »

St. John of Kronstadt, My Life in Christ, p. 70:
When you doubt the truth of any person or event described in Holy Scripture, then remember that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” as the Apostle says and is therefore true, and does not contain any imaginary persons, fables, and tales, although it includes parables, which everyone can see are not true narratives, but are written in figurative language. The whole of the word of God is single, entire, indivisible truth; and if you admit that any narrative, sentence, or word is untrue, then you sin against the truth of the whole of Holy Scripture and its primordial truth, which is God Himself. “I am the truth,” said the Lord; “Thy word is truth,” said Jesus Christ to God the Father. Thus, consider the whole of the Holy Scripture as truth; everything that is said in it has either taken place or takes place.


But it also shouldn't all be taken literally, and there are some minor (never major) errors within it, including some historical errors on the OT. You also have the issue where some ancient manuscripts weren't translated or edited properly or accurately. Of course the vast majority of those are caught and never make a significant difference.

The Apostles were humans like we are and they were inspired by God to write what they did, but it was their hand and their minds, they were t possessed by God and it wasnt dictated by him.

The Bible is entirely true, but it shouldn't always be thought of as scientific or historical fact. Did Jesus literally and really rose from the dead? Yes he most certainly was... But was the Earth literally created in only six literal days? Probably not, but that is up to personal opinion as it isn't a science textbook.

We're all the books written by the Prophets and Apostles themselves? Probably not all of them, but that doesn't change their God-inspired nature, because they aren't especially God inspired because of who wrote them, but because the Church recognizes them as being God inspired. So the search for the "original" NT text unedited doesnt matter because the additions and edits are all God inspired.
Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,194



WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2012, 04:21:05 AM »

Well, The Scripture is the writing down of Divine Revelation. How can Divine Revelation not be correct? The question would be if it was written down correctly. Well, the God-inspired Saints of The Church say that it was. Our duty is to preserve it and to make sure the translations are correct, etc.

The Scripture is simple and there is really not much room for interpretation. However, one's faith in God is absolutely needed, otherwise Scripture will mean nothing or will always be questioned (same as God is questioned).
That's not to say that there aren't layers of understanding and Divine Mysteries hidden in The Scriptures that require that we progress and attain higher and deeper understanding.  I would be careful about getting into the metaphorical versus literal discussion; it can be that there is really no "versus", that both may exist at the same time. Regardless, it is very clear when something is a parable, or a dream, or a narration. For example, Genesis is a narration, it is literal, but there are many "unseen" elements (or theological understandings) that can result from that narration.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2012, 04:22:55 AM by IoanC » Logged

IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,194



WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2012, 04:22:31 AM »

Well, The Scripture is the writing down of Divine Revelation. How can Divine Revelation not be correct? The question would be if it was written down correctly. Well, the God-inspired Saints of The Church say that it was. Our duty is to preserve it and to make sure the translations are correct, etc.

The Scripture is simple and there is really not much room for interpretation. However, one's faith in God is absolutely needed, otherwise Scripture will mean nothing or will always be questioned (same as God is questioned).
That's not to say that there aren't layers of understanding and Divine Mysteries hidden in The Scriptures that require that we progress and attain higher and deeper understanding.  I would be careful about getting into the metaphorical versus literal discussion; it can be that there is really no "versus", that both may exist at the same time. Regardless, it is very clear when something is a parable, or a dream, or a narration. For example, Genesis is a narration, it is literal, but there are many "unseen" elements (or theological understandings) that can result from that narration.
Logged

Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,565


« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2012, 07:04:52 AM »

Do Orthodox Christian believe that bible is 100% correct and no mistake?

I suppose it all depends on what one means by "no mistake" and who you ask.  If you mean is every bible that has ever been in print accurate with no mistakes, I would say no.  If you ask me if the scripture God provided mankind accurate with no mistakes, I would say yes.  Some bibles stink in their translation and some aren’t even worth being called a translations, rather a cliffs notes version of the original.

I think, in general, for what you are asking, I would say yes to both.
Logged
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 2,498



WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2012, 08:13:24 AM »

The big problem with the "correctness" of the Bible is that for us, modern people, "truth" must be like a photograph, a prosaic copy into text of reality.

But photographs did not exist in the Ancient times. Even the "realistic" statues of the Greeks were not so real, since they represented ideal human beings (always physically perfect) and not real ones.

When someone was to give witness of something in any form of art - sculpting, painting, writing, music of singing poetry - nobody was expecting or even imagining that it was a historical witness in the photographic sense we expect today. They knew there was style and rethoric and aesthetics involved.

Keeping that in mind, the books that were later put together in that small portable library that is the Bible have varying purposes, which the Septuaginta made explicit: Law, History, Wisdom and Prophets.

Law comprises the Pentateuch, the first five books. The name is revealing. Genesis is *not* part of the Historical books as modern literalists would put it. It is part of a vast contextualization and justification of the Mosaic laws. It *has* historical elements to it, even of natural history, but that is not what it is meant to be. Put on top of that the fact that even the historic (and natural) events are not portrayed in a photographic way, but in a religious way and huge quotation marks must be put on most of the things there.

Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 2,498



WWW
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2012, 08:46:21 AM »

From our photographic expectations - again, non-existent at the time - from Abraham on is when things start getting closer to attend what *we* would call "historical".  Genesis *is* literal in the sense that what it conveys - that One God created all that exists, that sin and death are not His will for us, that we stray from Him in our disobedience, that neither God nor us are not the first cause of evil some pessimists paint , but an exterior, personal individual being, that God loves and cares about us, and acts in our personal lives and in the historical events that mark humanity, this is all literally true.

Now a personal perspective. This is my own interpretation of Orthodox and other sources, so it is but a theologumen.

I do believe that physical laws have changed in time. In fact, I believe the very nature of time has changed. This is a witness that is universal, even outside Jewish-Christian sources. A "Golden Age" where time somehow developed under different rules, where we were "immortal", and the world a kind of garden for us, and we were created by a God (or gods) is widespread in Human cultures. Maybe it is just a psychological issue, a vice of "old times were better", but I think the resurrection is a precedent to think otherwise.

The resurrection claims nothing less than a change in natural law. We were "prisoners of death" and we no longer are. The rules changed. We will resurrect, and physically speaking, this means entropy will be abolished. Now the abolition of entropy has widely reaching consequences. It can only happen with radical changes to space-time as we know it.
One of the assumptions – and indeed dogmas of faith – of modern science is that the physical laws don’t and can’t change.  Jesus’ resurrection is a proof that they can and have changed. If that is the case, the pan-religious concept of “eons” where the very rules of existence are different, becomes more plausible. And all these theories – Genesis included – put our origins in this other space-time where we were “killable” but not naturally “dying”.  If that is true, then evolution is just a kind of parallax mistake, it is what the origin looks like from this side of the change of eons, if the laws of nature had always been like they are today.
This is what can be called “Triathlon” model where the runners have to change from swimming, to cycling to running. The rules and means of the race change along the competition. If one tried to explain why and how runner A got there first and assumed that they all had been just running all the time, the person would have to make a lot of assumptions about the speed a human being can run to account for the not-seen cycling period and about how we could have crossed that stretch of water. These assumptions would be correct in that they would account for how a man can cross water or run that much faster. Maybe the scientist from the running perspective would say the man had a different density when crossing the water, and that he was faster because he was younger and lighter, but as he got close to the finishing line he got heavier and more dense. Or maybe he would say that there was an alternative, shorter way for the runners and they had never crossed the water or used the road at all. One of these theories would *necessarily* be true, if running was all that the man could do. But it so happens it is not.
I believe that is what happens to the universe. It could do otherwise in the past and it did. And Jesus came precisely to put reality back on track and bring it closer to Him.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2012, 08:56:50 AM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic Orthodoxy
Posts: 4,695


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #14 on: October 29, 2012, 12:11:57 AM »

*Can* an Orthodox Christian believe in Scriptural inerrancy?
Logged



May the Risen Lord have mercy on all of His servants, especially in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, occupied Palestine, & Serbian Kosovo.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #15 on: October 29, 2012, 08:11:50 AM »

yeah of course.
Logged
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic Orthodoxy
Posts: 4,695


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 29, 2012, 10:46:23 AM »

yeah of course.
Does the OC accept Master Origen's view that God purposely placed errors in Scripture for believers to search for the text's greater spiritual meaning?
Logged



May the Risen Lord have mercy on all of His servants, especially in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, occupied Palestine, & Serbian Kosovo.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #17 on: October 29, 2012, 11:01:54 AM »

yeah of course.
Does the OC accept Master Origen's view that God purposely placed errors in Scripture for believers to search for the text's greater spiritual meaning?

not that i know of. sounds whack to me.
Logged
recent convert
Orthodox Chrisitan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian (N.A.)
Posts: 1,800


« Reply #18 on: October 29, 2012, 11:58:11 AM »

The thing is the Lord told us via the samaritan woman in John 4:24 to worship God in spirit & in truth. He summed up the old covenant with the golden rule & the 2 great commands. St. Paul seems to expound on this in 2 Corinthians 3. How some of the more difficult aspects of the old covenant reconcile in this I do not know & yet in the summation of the faith (thanks be to the Lord Jesus Christ & His commands) there is the beauty of salvation. In 2 Corinthians 3:17, St. Paul states (which seems to explain what the Lord says in John 4:24), "Now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." (KJV). The need for commitment to the faith the Lord gives us is enough to occupy us 24/7 & this includes our intellects (as we are able). This is where the worship of the church in the divine liturgy turns us to God & our liberty is fulfilled. Reading the Bible enriches the laypersons faith & protects us against human abuses that can manifest among the clergy or laity.
Logged

Antiochian OC N.A.
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #19 on: October 29, 2012, 12:03:09 PM »

*Can* an Orthodox Christian believe in Scriptural inerrancy?

No they cannot and they certainly shouldn't. They be very wrong to believe so. We don't have concepts of inerrancy or infallibility. Is scripture true? Yes. Is it without any kind if error? No.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #20 on: October 29, 2012, 12:03:52 PM »

yeah of course.
Does the OC accept Master Origen's view that God purposely placed errors in Scripture for believers to search for the text's greater spiritual meaning?

Citation please? Preferably with the rest of the context of his statement.
Logged
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic Orthodoxy
Posts: 4,695


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #21 on: October 31, 2012, 04:44:55 PM »

yeah of course.
Does the OC accept Master Origen's view that God purposely placed errors in Scripture for believers to search for the text's greater spiritual meaning?

Citation please? Preferably with the rest of the context of his statement.
I think it's in his "philocalia." I will have to give a more detailed response later.

--Gotta dash
Logged



May the Risen Lord have mercy on all of His servants, especially in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, occupied Palestine, & Serbian Kosovo.
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,439



« Reply #22 on: October 31, 2012, 04:58:07 PM »

Do Orthodox Christian believe that bible is 100% correct and no mistake?

Of course.  It is also mysteriological and multi-valent. 
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #23 on: October 31, 2012, 05:29:17 PM »

Do Orthodox Christian believe that bible is 100% correct and no mistake?

Of course.  It is also mysteriological and multi-valent. 

Of course as in it is 100% true? Not as in it is 100% inerrant? There are some factual historical & scientific errors in it, some translations (including ancient ones) have some mistakes and inconsistencies (none that affect doctrine or important things).

We have to be careful how we word these things and how we phrase our arguments, lest we come across as crazy Protestant fundies.
Logged
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic Orthodoxy
Posts: 4,695


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #24 on: October 31, 2012, 05:34:23 PM »

Here's an excerpt from an article which discusses what I said earlier (see reply #16):

"What may appear as errors to us are intended by the Holy Spirit, to call the reader’s attention to 'the impossibility of the literal sense', and therefore signal the need for 'an examination of the inner meaning.'"

The article discusses Origen's view of the Bible.

http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/gray-origen.shtml
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 05:35:52 PM by Severian » Logged



May the Risen Lord have mercy on all of His servants, especially in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, occupied Palestine, & Serbian Kosovo.
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #25 on: October 31, 2012, 05:38:38 PM »

Here's an excerpt from an article which discusses what I said earlier (see reply #16):

"What may appear as errors to us are intended by the Holy Spirit, to call the reader’s attention to 'the impossibility of the literal sense', and therefore signal the need for 'an examination of the inner meaning.'"

The article discusses Origen's view of the Bible.

http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/gray-origen.shtml

Well, Origen isn't a Church Father or a Saint. On top of that, we don't hang on every word of a Saint or Father, they sometimes said things that were wrong.

The writers of the scriptures were humans and made errors. They weren't being dictated the scriptures by God.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 05:39:30 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic Orthodoxy
Posts: 4,695


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 31, 2012, 05:41:07 PM »

Here's an excerpt from an article which discusses what I said earlier (see reply #16):

"What may appear as errors to us are intended by the Holy Spirit, to call the reader’s attention to 'the impossibility of the literal sense', and therefore signal the need for 'an examination of the inner meaning.'"

The article discusses Origen's view of the Bible.

http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/gray-origen.shtml

Well, Origen isn't a Church Father or a Saint. On top of that, we don't hang on every word of a Saint or Father, they sometimes said things that were wrong.

The writers of the scriptures were humans and made errors. They weren't being dictated the scriptures by God.
I know. I was simply providing a reference to what I said earlier.
Logged



May the Risen Lord have mercy on all of His servants, especially in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, occupied Palestine, & Serbian Kosovo.
Randa
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Non Sectarian
Posts: 34


« Reply #27 on: October 31, 2012, 06:36:22 PM »

What do you mean by "correct"? There are different traditions of understanding and reading the Bible. In my own church, the Coptic Orthodox Church, we tend toward metaphorical, not necessarily literal readings of the scriptures. This does not mean that the Bible is "false" at all...only that sometimes what we read in the text is not necessarily how the text has been understood in history. If you read the Early Church Fathers' commentaries on the scriptures, you'll see that there are many different opinions and understandings on any given passage, all without asking whether it's "true" or "false".



LOL, the exact same thing can be said about the Talmudic Rabbis.

Over literalism can be very dangerous, just look at the Wahabi Saudis.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #28 on: October 31, 2012, 06:50:11 PM »

St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration II: In Defence of His Flight to Pontus, and His Return, After His Ordination to the Priesthood, with an Exposition of the Character of the Priestly Office , ch. 105, NPNF2-7. p.225
We however, who extend the accuracy of the Spirit to the merest stroke and tittle, will never admit the impious assertion that even the smallest matters were dealt with haphazard by those who have recorded them, and have thus been borne in mind down to the present day: on the contrary, their purpose has been to supply memorials and instructions for our consideration under similar circumstances, should such befall us, and that the examples of the past might serve as rules and models, for our warning and imitation.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,565


« Reply #29 on: October 31, 2012, 07:18:25 PM »

Do Orthodox Christian believe that bible is 100% correct and no mistake?

Of course.  It is also mysteriological and multi-valent. 

Of course as in it is 100% true? Not as in it is 100% inerrant? There are some factual historical & scientific errors in it, some translations (including ancient ones) have some mistakes and inconsistencies (none that affect doctrine or important things).

We have to be careful how we word these things and how we phrase our arguments, lest we come across as crazy Protestant fundies.
Yes, of course the bible is historically and scientifically inaccurate.  Science is always right and no one has ever proven something historically accurate by using scriptures when history books said it was wrong.  Right?
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #30 on: October 31, 2012, 08:38:08 PM »

Do Orthodox Christian believe that bible is 100% correct and no mistake?

Of course.  It is also mysteriological and multi-valent.  

Of course as in it is 100% true? Not as in it is 100% inerrant? There are some factual historical & scientific errors in it, some translations (including ancient ones) have some mistakes and inconsistencies (none that affect doctrine or important things).

We have to be careful how we word these things and how we phrase our arguments, lest we come across as crazy Protestant fundies.
Yes, of course the bible is historically and scientifically inaccurate.  Science is always right and no one has ever proven something historically accurate by using scriptures when history books said it was wrong.  Right?

Your sarcasm falls flat on your face. I never said it was historically and scientifically inaccurate, I said there are some factual errors in it.

Unless you are an idiot/retarded Fundamentalist, you shouldn't believe that its perfect. Orthodox Christians should not believe it is perfect or inerrant. If you do, then you need to get rid of your Protestant fundamentalism, it has no place in the church.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 08:38:21 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #31 on: October 31, 2012, 08:50:09 PM »

St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 2.18.2. We should leave things of that nature to God who created us, being most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #32 on: October 31, 2012, 09:00:09 PM »

St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 2.18.2. We should leave things of that nature to God who created us, being most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit

Like I've said before, we aren't like Protestant fundies. The Church Fathers & Saints don't replace Scripture on "infallibility". Just because you quote from a Saint doesn't mean much unless measured against the rest of Church history & the Fathers.

Fundamentalism is not Orthodox.

The scriptures are holy, God-breathed works. But they are works written by humans in human words, with human errors.

No one is saying Christ didn't rise from the dead or that David didn't exist. What we are saying is that there are minor errors, including some factual errors.

You're an idiot if you try to insist that the universe could have only been created in 6 literal days literally as written in Genesis. Earlier Church Fathers didn't know any better and we can't fault them for it, but we can certainly fault you for believing it because you should know better now. Church Fathers knew the value of science and used it rather than disregarding it.

If you want to be Orthodox, give up your Fundamentalism.
 You are warned for 30 days for using ad hominems--"You're an idiot... and ""give up your Fundamentalism." Watch you temper and language please. Carl Kraeff
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #33 on: October 31, 2012, 09:07:42 PM »

Met. Hierotheos Vlachos, The Person in the Orthodox Tradition, p. 46:
Fourthly, Basil the Great does not entirely accept the science of his time, but he judges it by theological criteria, as can be seen in his homilies about the six days of creation.

Fr. Michael Pomazansky says of St. Basil: “St. Basil acknowledges all the scientific facts of natural science. But he does not accept the philosophical conceptions, or the interpretations of the facts … St. Basil the Great knew how to raise himself above the theories contemporary to him concerning the basic principles of the world.” “Talks on the Six Days by St. Basil the Great and Talks on the Days of Creation by St. John of Kronstadt,”  Pravoslavny put’ (The Orthodox Way) annual, 1958, p. 39, 41

St. Theophan the Recluse, St Feofan Zatvornik, Nastavleniya v duhovnoi zhisni. - Pskov-Pechery Monastery of Holy Dormition: Mosc. Patriarchate Publ., 1994, http://creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html :
The positive teaching of the Church serves to know whether a concept is from the Truth. This is a litmus test for all teachings. Whatever agrees with it, you should accept it, whatever does not- - reject. One can do it without further deliberations.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 09:09:54 PM by jckstraw72 » Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #34 on: October 31, 2012, 09:16:35 PM »

Met. Hierotheos Vlachos, The Person in the Orthodox Tradition, p. 46:
Fourthly, Basil the Great does not entirely accept the science of his time, but he judges it by theological criteria, as can be seen in his homilies about the six days of creation.

Fr. Michael Pomazansky says of St. Basil: “St. Basil acknowledges all the scientific facts of natural science. But he does not accept the philosophical conceptions, or the interpretations of the facts … St. Basil the Great knew how to raise himself above the theories contemporary to him concerning the basic principles of the world.” “Talks on the Six Days by St. Basil the Great and Talks on the Days of Creation by St. John of Kronstadt,”  Pravoslavny put’ (The Orthodox Way) annual, 1958, p. 39, 41

St. Theophan the Recluse, St Feofan Zatvornik, Nastavleniya v duhovnoi zhisni. - Pskov-Pechery Monastery of Holy Dormition: Mosc. Patriarchate Publ., 1994, http://creatio.orthodoxy.ru/sbornik/sbufeev_whynot_english.html :
The positive teaching of the Church serves to know whether a concept is from the Truth. This is a litmus test for all teachings. Whatever agrees with it, you should accept it, whatever does not- - reject. One can do it without further deliberations.


You're an idiot if you think any of that means you shouldn't use the brain God gave you deny all scientific and historical fact that you personally think contradicts the Bible.

We aren't a religion of gurus jck. Just quoting fathers & saints doesn't do anything, just like quoting scripture doesn't "prove" anything. We don't have gurus, and we don't blindly follow our Saints and our Fathers.

If you are a fundamentalist & Biblical literalist (especially when it comes to scripture), you're an idiot, plain and simple.

Who are you going to quote next? Elder Paisios and Fr. Seraphim Rose? lol

I can quote people too, I have St. Augustine immediately on my mind, and for modern figures/authors there are Dr. Jeannie Constantinou and Metropolitan Kallistos Ware.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 09:17:55 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #35 on: October 31, 2012, 09:17:50 PM »

St. Augustine, Letter to Jerome 1.3:
For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #36 on: October 31, 2012, 09:18:45 PM »

St. Augustine, Letter to Jerome 1.3:
For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error.

You're a heretic if you believe in Fundamentalism and absolute Biblical Literalism.

jckstraw, you seem to simply be a Protestant Fundamentalist in Orthodox clothing. Instead of quoting the Bible to "prove" your point, you now quote Saints, Fathers, spiritual mothers & fathers etc... Do you think you are proving some point by doing so? You are no more effective in your argument than the Protestant Fundamentalist idiots out there.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 09:20:50 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic Orthodoxy
Posts: 4,695


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #37 on: October 31, 2012, 09:23:37 PM »

Logged



May the Risen Lord have mercy on all of His servants, especially in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, occupied Palestine, & Serbian Kosovo.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #38 on: October 31, 2012, 09:24:16 PM »

St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah 1.4, PG 70.192AB:
Those who reject the historical meaning in the God-inspired Scriptures as something obsolete are avoiding the ability to apprehend rightly, according to the proper manner, the things written in them. For indeed spiritual contemplation is both good and profitable; and, in enlightening the eye of reason especially well, it reveals the wisest things. But whenever some historical events are presented to us by the Holy Scriptures, then in that instance, a useful search into the historical meaning is appropriate, in order that the God-inspired Scripture be revealed as salvific and beneficial to us in every way.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #39 on: October 31, 2012, 09:24:52 PM »

I can play your game too:

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion."
-St. Augustine, Literal Meaning of Genesis. Translation by J. H. Taylor in Ancient Christian Writers, Newman Press, 1982, volume 41.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #40 on: October 31, 2012, 09:26:30 PM »

St. Methodios, Concerning Chastity 3.2:
For it is a dangerous thing wholly to despise the literal meaning, as has been said, and especially of Genesis.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #41 on: October 31, 2012, 09:27:40 PM »

St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah 1.4, PG 70.192AB:
Those who reject the historical meaning in the God-inspired Scriptures as something obsolete are avoiding the ability to apprehend rightly, according to the proper manner, the things written in them. For indeed spiritual contemplation is both good and profitable; and, in enlightening the eye of reason especially well, it reveals the wisest things. But whenever some historical events are presented to us by the Holy Scriptures, then in that instance, a useful search into the historical meaning is appropriate, in order that the God-inspired Scripture be revealed as salvific and beneficial to us in every way.


Again, your quotations are useless.

The historical interpretation of scripture is very important. It is also very important we don't ignore the fact that things like the resurrection really happened.

However, to assume that every bit of the Bible, including the reigns of kings, battles & historical references are 100% accurate is just plain stupid, and has proven to be wrong.

Like I said, you are acting like a Protestant Fundamentalist in Orthodox clothing.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #42 on: October 31, 2012, 09:28:26 PM »

St. Augustine, On Genesis: The Refutation of the Manichees 2.3:
So then, this whole text must first be discussed in terms of history, and then in terms of prophecy. In terms of history deeds and events are being related, in terms of prophecy future events are being foretold. One should not look with a jaundiced eye, to be sure, on anyone who wants to take everything that is said here absolutely literally, and who can avoid blasphemy in doing so, and present everything as in accordance with Catholic faith; on the contrary one should hold up such a person as an outstanding and holy admirable understander of the text.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #43 on: October 31, 2012, 09:29:20 PM »

jckstraw, as I said, you're nothing but a Protestant Fundamentalist parading around in Orthodox clothing, and instead of quoting the Bible as your "proof' you are quoting the Fathers. Give it up, and either accept the Orthodox faith or go join the fundie retards.
Logged
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic Orthodoxy
Posts: 4,695


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #44 on: October 31, 2012, 09:31:53 PM »


I guess not... Cry

Better make my 3500th post a good one!
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 09:32:21 PM by Severian » Logged



May the Risen Lord have mercy on all of His servants, especially in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, occupied Palestine, & Serbian Kosovo.
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #45 on: October 31, 2012, 09:34:05 PM »


I guess not... Cry

Better make my 3500th post a good one!

I'm sick of the invasion of Protestant Fundamentalists into Orthodoxy. They either need to completely abandon their former idiocy, or go back to it. They can't be truly Orthodox and still hold on to those ideas, even if they transfer them to another source (like the Fathers or Saints).
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 3,709


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #46 on: October 31, 2012, 09:36:49 PM »

Where did the bible come from again Tongue

The EO faith would not proclaim mistakes in the bible, but is not sola scriptura.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #47 on: October 31, 2012, 09:40:51 PM »

Where did the bible come from again Tongue

The EO faith would not proclaim mistakes in the bible, but is not sola scriptura.

There are inconsistencies, contradictions, and some more minor errors. There are also historical errors in the Old Testament.

At the same time, the Bible is 100% true, but truth is different from "actual factual". Did David and the other Patriarchs and Prophets exist? Yes, but it doesn't matter if the Bible is wrong in recording exactly when they existed.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #48 on: October 31, 2012, 09:54:39 PM »

Bp. Michael Dahulich, Synoptic Gospels course at St. Tikhon's Seminary: "for the Fathers, there are no contradictions in Scripture."

... he's a Protestant Fundamentalist of the cradle-Orthodox variety!
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 09:56:01 PM by jckstraw72 » Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #49 on: October 31, 2012, 10:00:06 PM »

Bp. Michael Dahulich, Synoptic Gospels course at St. Tikhon's Seminary: "for the Fathers, there are no contradictions in Scripture."

... he's a Protestant Fundamentalist of the cradle-Orthodox variety!

You really need to learn about textual criticism, the Documentary Hypothesis and general Biblical study.

Should I also link you to videos/podcasts by Bishop Kallistos Ware & Dr. Jeannie Constantinou?
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #50 on: October 31, 2012, 10:02:23 PM »

Bp. Michael Dahulich, Synoptic Gospels course at St. Tikhon's Seminary: "for the Fathers, there are no contradictions in Scripture."

... he's a Protestant Fundamentalist of the cradle-Orthodox variety!

You really need to learn about textual criticism, the Documentary Hypothesis and general Biblical study.

Should I also link you to videos/podcasts by Bishop Kallistos Ware & Dr. Jeannie Constantinou?

are they your gurus?
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #51 on: October 31, 2012, 10:05:14 PM »

Bp. Michael Dahulich, Synoptic Gospels course at St. Tikhon's Seminary: "for the Fathers, there are no contradictions in Scripture."

... he's a Protestant Fundamentalist of the cradle-Orthodox variety!

You really need to learn about textual criticism, the Documentary Hypothesis and general Biblical study.

Should I also link you to videos/podcasts by Bishop Kallistos Ware & Dr. Jeannie Constantinou?

are they your gurus?

No they are actually learned about these things. Just because one is advanced in their spiritual life doesn't make them scientifically or historically knowledgeable.

I'm sure there are some really holy monks out there who are far closer to God than I am, but there may also be one or two that believe that Jews run the world & the earth is literally only a few thousand years old.

You'll find a lot of people out there who believe that 9/11 was an inside job. Even if they are "smart" people doesn't make them smart about that. If you want to really know about real engineering & structural integrity, look towards the vast majority of engineers out there who don't believe that conspiracy crap.

Are you one of those Orthodox Christians who will go to their Priest for absolutely everything? If you are injured, you don't go run to your Priest, you go to the emergency room where nurses & doctors can use their knowledge to fix you. If you are suffering from severe depression and/or thoughts of suicide, you don't just go to your Priest, you also seek after a trained, licensed psychologist. If you need a building built, you go to an architect.

If you want to know about science, you go to a scientist, not a monk. If you want to know about history, you go to a historian, not a monk.

If you want to know why the world was created by God, and why we are here, seek a monk. But if you want to know how it was created and how long ago, seek a scientist.

If you want to know about ancient Israel & it's spiritual journey, seek an Orthodox authority. If you want to know about when ancient Israel existed, it's battles, it's migrations, it's physical existence, seek a historian/archaeologist.

We don't throw our brains out the door when we become Orthodox.


_____________________________________

I'm sure there may even be some Saints who insisted or believed that St. George really fought a dragon or a mountain literally was moved for Saints. Does that mean that is fact? No. In fact, dragons don't exist, never existed; and mountains were never moved. Those stories were illustrating profound spiritual points, not literal, historical "facts".
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 10:15:21 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
MichaelArchangelos
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Inquirer
Posts: 103



« Reply #52 on: November 01, 2012, 12:12:27 AM »

Why are people willing to go to such lengths to try to "marry" the Bible to evolutionary pseudoscience? Why can't you trust what God says? He said "in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it" (Exodus 20:11). If the six days were really long periods of time, then the Sabbath rest would have no meaning. This is why in Genesis He specifically said "And the evening and the morning were the first day" (Genesis 1:5) - so that we would know that it is a literal day with a literal morning and evening.

 Evolution is as much a religion as Christianity - except that evolution is much harder to believe in since everything that exists must have been the result of chance.

Evolution is NOT science. It is speculation about what went on in the past. Macroevolution (one kind of animal changing into another) is not observable, testable and demonstrable.

Can Orthodox Christians believe that Adam and Eve were not real people but that the story was just a myth? If so, then that means that certain Bible passages (Romans 5, 1 Corinthians 15) make no sense. If there was no Adam and Eve, then there was no sin and no Fall. If there is no sin, then there is no need for a Saviour. See where this leads?

I urge you, please don't depart from the literal meaning of Genesis 1 and 2 just to fit in with pseudoscientific theories that have been proven false. I can give you several links to sites that demonstrate that evolutionism is false. The reason that the theory is still kept alive is that the only alternative, Creation, is clearly unthinkable to scientists dedicated to materialism and atheism.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 12:13:53 AM by MichaelArchangelos » Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #53 on: November 01, 2012, 12:21:11 AM »

Adam and Eve are commemorated as Saints (shyah - literal people) on the 2 Sundays preceding Nativity.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,959


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #54 on: November 01, 2012, 12:24:55 AM »

Bp. Michael Dahulich, Synoptic Gospels course at St. Tikhon's Seminary: "for the Fathers, there are no contradictions in Scripture."

... he's a Protestant Fundamentalist of the cradle-Orthodox variety!

You really need to learn about textual criticism, the Documentary Hypothesis and general Biblical study.

Should I also link you to videos/podcasts by Bishop Kallistos Ware & Dr. Jeannie Constantinou?

Because the commentary and interpretation of the fathers is antiquaited, quaint, and will get you laughed at (especially by Orthodox).
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #55 on: November 01, 2012, 12:37:24 AM »

Why are people willing to go to such lengths to try to "marry" the Bible to evolutionary pseudoscience? Why can't you trust what God says? He said "in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it" (Exodus 20:11). If the six days were really long periods of time, then the Sabbath rest would have no meaning. This is why in Genesis He specifically said "And the evening and the morning were the first day" (Genesis 1:5) - so that we would know that it is a literal day with a literal morning and evening.

 Evolution is as much a religion as Christianity - except that evolution is much harder to believe in since everything that exists must have been the result of chance.

Evolution is NOT science. It is speculation about what went on in the past. Macroevolution (one kind of animal changing into another) is not observable, testable and demonstrable.

Can Orthodox Christians believe that Adam and Eve were not real people but that the story was just a myth? If so, then that means that certain Bible passages (Romans 5, 1 Corinthians 15) make no sense. If there was no Adam and Eve, then there was no sin and no Fall. If there is no sin, then there is no need for a Saviour. See where this leads?

I urge you, please don't depart from the literal meaning of Genesis 1 and 2 just to fit in with pseudoscientific theories that have been proven false. I can give you several links to sites that demonstrate that evolutionism is false. The reason that the theory is still kept alive is that the only alternative, Creation, is clearly unthinkable to scientists dedicated to materialism and atheism.

Wow, you really don't understand science or evolution. Please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, don't bring your Protestant Fundamentalism with you into Orthodoxy.

Metropolitan Kallistos Ware:
http://youtu.be/jSVPZykCRyQ

Presbytera Dr. Jeannie Constantinou:

Inspiration & Inerrancy:
Part 1: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/introduction_to_the_bible_lesson_2_inspiration_and_inerrancy
Part 2: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/introduction_to_the_bible_lesson_3_inspiration_and_inerrancy_continued

Genesis:
Part 1: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/introduction_to_genesis
Part 2: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/genesis_verse_by_verse_-_1
Part 3: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/genesis_verse_by_verse_-_2
Part 4: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/genesis_verse_by_verse_-_3

Isaiah:
(here she again discusses how scripture is always true, but not always meant to be descriptive)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/searchthescriptures/isaiah_6

_____________________________________________

If you insist on reading the Bible on the literal level, you are reading it at the lowest level possible, the lowest spiritual level. You are reading it very much like  Jew, and not in a good way. Do you want to grow in your faith and do you want to start eating meat rather than pudding? Do you want to move onto full, grown-up meals instead of little Gerber baby meals? If so, then grow up! Move on to higher levels of interpretation and understand that the Bible isn't a scientific document and isn't a historical textbook.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #56 on: November 01, 2012, 12:40:35 AM »

Adam and Eve are commemorated as Saints (shyah - literal people) on the 2 Sundays preceding Nativity.

Your point being? You do know that there are probably at least 1 or 2 Saints in our hagiography that probably didn't exist right?

Do you also believe that dragons exist? That mountains literally move from one spot to the other?

Do you believe in a literal, earth-encompassing flood?

Stop using people like Fr. Seraphim Rose as your guide for non-spiritual matters for God's sake.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,565


« Reply #57 on: November 01, 2012, 06:39:39 AM »

Do Orthodox Christian believe that bible is 100% correct and no mistake?

Of course.  It is also mysteriological and multi-valent.  

Of course as in it is 100% true? Not as in it is 100% inerrant? There are some factual historical & scientific errors in it, some translations (including ancient ones) have some mistakes and inconsistencies (none that affect doctrine or important things).

We have to be careful how we word these things and how we phrase our arguments, lest we come across as crazy Protestant fundies.
Yes, of course the bible is historically and scientifically inaccurate.  Science is always right and no one has ever proven something historically accurate by using scriptures when history books said it was wrong.  Right?

Your sarcasm falls flat on your face. I never said it was historically and scientifically inaccurate, I said there are some factual errors in it.

Unless you are an idiot/retarded Fundamentalist, you shouldn't believe that its perfect. Orthodox Christians should not believe it is perfect or inerrant. If you do, then you need to get rid of your Protestant fundamentalism, it has no place in the church.

As I read other posts after your reply to mine, and including your reply to my post, it is obvious you are passionate about this topic.  This is normally not a problem, but I see your passion interfering with your ability to reasonably respond to other posters and I would ask you take a moment to respond without the indirect name calling and accusations.  Whether you mean them to be as such, it has the appearance. 

I am having a difficult time understanding your view with inerrant and factual.  Inerrant, by definition, means without error.  Truth, by definition, means factual.  The two, in my mind are the same, yet you create a distinction between them that escapes me.  How can something be factual, yet inaccurate?  To show what I mean, but using a very different analogy, a person could say God doesn’t exist and then turn around and say God is a evil spirited child who likes to cause pain and suffering in the world.  If God didn’t exist, He couldn’t be anything, much less what was described and if He was as described, then He does, in fact, exist.  So, for something to be true it must not have error and if it has error, it can’t be true.  If there are factual errors, it is inaccurate.  This isn’t scrabble (word game).

Having said this, if the scriptures are filled with historical inaccuracies and scientific errors, why do we learn new information on a regular and continuous basis which reveals the scriptures to be more historically accurate than ever previously believed and the more we learn of them and of science, to be more accurate in that aspect than previously believed?  Science, to be completely honest here, has little to do with God and how He chose to operate within scripture.  God is not limited to human science.  If He were, Jesus would never have been born.  Unless you mean the “flat earth” propaganda presented by people who try to discredit Christianity and Judaism.  Historically, cultures and lost cities, thought to have been fabricated, and people as well, have been discovered, using nothing more than the scriptures to find them.  You mentioned ancient translations.  Ignoring the fact any time you translate from one language to another, there will always be minor changes (which I hope is not what you are talking about), how do you know the other manuscripts you use to make comparison are themselves accurate?  There is a lot of assumption in your argument, which is not a real problem, until you began to let yourself become emotionally charged (i.e., saying people who believe one thing or another are not really Orthodox and should either give up or become protestant).  I find comments like this reprehensible, but to each his own.  I suppose I am an idiot/retarded Protestant fundamentalist, at least I think this was your wording, for believing the scriptures themselves are as perfect as anything God has ever created.  Call me crazy, but I am not the one making statements like, “You're an idiot if you try to insist that the universe could have only been created in 6 literal days” as if it were not possible for God to do this very thing.  My idea of an idiot would be to limit Gods ability and to think I, as a puny human, know exactly how God does anything, but that’s just me.  Perhaps I’m a heretic as well.  But, what you really mean to say is, an idiot is someone who disagrees with you and your ideas. 

Again, you claim certain things of historical significance in scripture has been proven wrong, yet every day we learn those things actually did happen and take place as described in the scriptures.  Why wouldn’t someone, after seeing this happen multiple times, NOT believe scripture more accurate than someone’s guess work?  (Sodom, Pontius Pilate, King David, etc.) 

You do know that there are probably at least 1 or 2 Saints in our hagiography that probably didn't exist right?
Probably didn’t and didn’t are not the same.  Because you think it may be so in no way makes it so.  If I understand it process accurately, fake people don’t get the title of saint because fake people can’t do the things required to get the title.

Do you also believe that dragons exist? That mountains literally move from one spot to the other?
That all depends on what you call a dragon.  Why can’t mountains literally move?  There you go placing limits on God again.  By the way, I know of several mountains that disappeared almost instantaneously. 

Do you believe in a literal, earth-encompassing flood?
 
Why not?  There is a substantial amount of evidence to suggest the possibility.  Because you disagree does not make you right and others wrong.  If you can believe life sprang forth from lifelessness, which has scientifically been proven wrong, someone else can believe in a world flood.

My point, in the end, is simply to relax and stop attacking people.  In this thread, you are the only one doing this and honestly, I am surprised it’s you.  I have come to expect much more from your posts.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #58 on: November 01, 2012, 09:56:12 AM »

Adam and Eve are commemorated as Saints (shyah - literal people) on the 2 Sundays preceding Nativity.

Your point being? You do know that there are probably at least 1 or 2 Saints in our hagiography that probably didn't exist right?

Do you also believe that dragons exist? That mountains literally move from one spot to the other?

Do you believe in a literal, earth-encompassing flood?

Stop using people like Fr. Seraphim Rose as your guide for non-spiritual matters for God's sake.

the point is rather obvious. you think you know better than the Saints who have stood at the very heart of theology, beholding a vision of the glorified Christ, and you think you know better than the liturgical life of the Church. knowing better than the Church is what is Protestant. the matter at hand is how to understand the Scriptures. thats a spiritual matter. and i haven't quoted Fr. Seraphim once. like it or not, what you say is not what the Church says.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 10:00:07 AM by jckstraw72 » Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #59 on: November 01, 2012, 10:30:11 AM »

He said "in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it" (Exodus 20:11). If the six days were really long periods of time, then the Sabbath rest would have no meaning. This is why in Genesis He specifically said "And the evening and the morning were the first day" (Genesis 1:5) - so that we would know that it is a literal day with a literal morning and evening.


1. We can deduce the speed of light from experiments and observations. (It's 300,000 meters per second)

2. We can use telescopes to see light from billions and billions of lightyears away. (Farthest observed: 13.14 Billion lightyears)

3. We can then conclude that there were objects in the Cosmos at least 13.14 Billion years ago.

There is no way the Cosmos are 7500 years old.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 10:41:56 AM by sheenj » Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #60 on: November 01, 2012, 10:36:11 AM »

St. Nikolai Velimirovich, Homilies, p. 116:
 For human understanding and human logic, however great they may be, are too puny to reach to the world’s beginning and its end. Understanding is useless where vision is needed. We need a seer, who sees as clearly as the sun – to see the whole world, from its beginning to its end, and the beginning and the end themselves. There has only ever been one such: the Lord Jesus Christ.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #61 on: November 01, 2012, 11:03:32 AM »

St. Nikolai Velimirovich, Homilies, p. 116:
 For human understanding and human logic, however great they may be, are too puny to reach to the world’s beginning and its end. Understanding is useless where vision is needed. We need a seer, who sees as clearly as the sun – to see the whole world, from its beginning to its end, and the beginning and the end themselves. There has only ever been one such: the Lord Jesus Christ.

Can you admit for once that even Saints can be wrong?

Proof texting saints as if they are an authority on science doesn't do any one any good.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #62 on: November 01, 2012, 11:06:54 AM »

i never said Saints cant be wrong. And yet they are the bearers of the Tradition. call me crazy, but when they speak, I respect it and I listen. they understand Scripture. why should i take your word over the consensus of the Saints? are you infallible?

if your position is so obviously wrong then surely you could find just one Saint who agrees. unless those poor Saints were always too stupid to rise above their lack of Darwinian science. the inspiration of the Spirit of God is so weak in the face of DARWIN! so sad that the Saints couldn't rise out of the mire.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 11:08:11 AM by jckstraw72 » Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #63 on: November 01, 2012, 11:18:46 AM »

i never said Saints cant be wrong. And yet they are the bearers of the Tradition. call me crazy, but when they speak, I respect it and I listen. they understand Scripture. why should i take your word over the consensus of the Saints? are you infallible?

if your position is so obviously wrong then surely you could find just one Saint who agrees. unless those poor Saints were always too stupid to rise above their lack of Darwinian science. the inspiration of the Spirit of God is so weak in the face of DARWIN! so sad that the Saints couldn't rise out of the mire.

No human is infallible except for Our Lord. What I was trying to say was that most of these saints you quote were speaking from a position of ignorance with regards to science.

Having faith does not and should not entail closing our eyes and ears against evidence that is all around us.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #64 on: November 01, 2012, 11:29:28 AM »

i never said Saints cant be wrong. And yet they are the bearers of the Tradition. call me crazy, but when they speak, I respect it and I listen. they understand Scripture. why should i take your word over the consensus of the Saints? are you infallible?

if your position is so obviously wrong then surely you could find just one Saint who agrees. unless those poor Saints were always too stupid to rise above their lack of Darwinian science. the inspiration of the Spirit of God is so weak in the face of DARWIN! so sad that the Saints couldn't rise out of the mire.

No human is infallible except for Our Lord. What I was trying to say was that most of these saints you quote were speaking from a position of ignorance with regards to science.

Having faith does not and should not entail closing our eyes and ears against evidence that is all around us.

im not quoting them in regards to science but in regards to how to approach Scripture. and illumination includes natural contemplation. i daresay the Saints understand creation far better than any scientist.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #65 on: November 01, 2012, 11:37:04 AM »

i never said Saints cant be wrong. And yet they are the bearers of the Tradition. call me crazy, but when they speak, I respect it and I listen. they understand Scripture. why should i take your word over the consensus of the Saints? are you infallible?

if your position is so obviously wrong then surely you could find just one Saint who agrees. unless those poor Saints were always too stupid to rise above their lack of Darwinian science. the inspiration of the Spirit of God is so weak in the face of DARWIN! so sad that the Saints couldn't rise out of the mire.

No human is infallible except for Our Lord. What I was trying to say was that most of these saints you quote were speaking from a position of ignorance with regards to science.

Having faith does not and should not entail closing our eyes and ears against evidence that is all around us.

im not quoting them in regards to science but in regards to how to approach Scripture. and illumination includes natural contemplation. i daresay the Saints understand creation far better than any scientist.

I agree that the Saints understand the whys of Creation better than any scientist. However, this discussion is about the hows, and science is better equipped to answer those questions.
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 3,709


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #66 on: November 01, 2012, 11:39:03 AM »

I'm sorry, I don't see any contradictions in the bible that are not explainable.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #67 on: November 01, 2012, 12:22:44 PM »

i never said Saints cant be wrong. And yet they are the bearers of the Tradition. call me crazy, but when they speak, I respect it and I listen. they understand Scripture. why should i take your word over the consensus of the Saints? are you infallible?

if your position is so obviously wrong then surely you could find just one Saint who agrees. unless those poor Saints were always too stupid to rise above their lack of Darwinian science. the inspiration of the Spirit of God is so weak in the face of DARWIN! so sad that the Saints couldn't rise out of the mire.

No human is infallible except for Our Lord. What I was trying to say was that most of these saints you quote were speaking from a position of ignorance with regards to science.

Having faith does not and should not entail closing our eyes and ears against evidence that is all around us.

im not quoting them in regards to science but in regards to how to approach Scripture. and illumination includes natural contemplation. i daresay the Saints understand creation far better than any scientist.

I agree that the Saints understand the whys of Creation better than any scientist. However, this discussion is about the hows, and science is better equipped to answer those questions.

THANK YOU!

Some people just fail to use their brains properly. People also don't understand evolution either. If one says things like "I didn't come from monkeys", or "Evolution is just a theory", then they clearly misunderstand both science and evolution. Statements like that are equivalent to a Muslim telling a Christian "God is not three" or a Protestant telling an Orthodox "we shouldn't worship images".

Such statements show a profound state of ignorance.
You cannot and should not proof-text saints as though they were the be-all end-all.

A spiritual man understands the spiritual state, and to a degree, the "why's". But they may not understand the how's.

It's like people who think heaven and hell are literal places, and God the Father (and his Son) sit on literal thrones.

These people's reasoning skills and biblical interpretation is so low, so basic that they fail to get beyond the literal sense, and they seem to think the literal sense is just as important and vital to our faith as the allegorical, typological and other senses.

To say "science has been proven wrong" is also an incorrect statement. The theory of evolution is a theory which has the backing of a lot of data. It has not been proven wrong yet. At the same time, it has not been proven to the point of being a "law". Theories are not things that are inherently false, theories aren't guesses. Theories are things which have been discovered through a profound amount of measurable, observable data which has not yet been proven wrong.

Like the theory of relativity and the speed of light. Could it possibly be proven wrong? It possibly could, but the evidence for the theory has shown that it is extremely unlikely that it could be broken. Can you bend around it through other laws? You probably can, such as the possibility of bending time and space itself to travel between two points at unimaginable speeds, or even passing through wormholes or other dimensions.

The simple fact is that our saints are not infallible and were limited to the science of their day and we shouldn't stubbornly adhere to it as though it were some holy revelation.

The earth is not flat, the earth is not the physical center of the universe, the earth is not only 6.000 years old, the earth doesn't have water suspended literally below and above (as posited by a small amount of Genesis literalists, including ancient Jews), Homo sapiens are not beings that popped out of thin air but rather we evolved (this doesn't change the fact we are made in the image of God), the sun and other planets do NOT revolve around the earth, the earth is not expanding outward (some literalists posit this as explanation for plate movement) and I could continue on and on and on.

Science does not contradict scripture because it does not and cannot ever discuss the existence of God and cannot explain or discuss the spiritual world or life. Science is limited to what can be observed and measured. This means that it can tell us how old the world is, and how it and the universe actually came to be, but it cannot tell us why it came to be. It cannot say whether or not the universe is pre-existing. It cannot say whether angels exist or whether, when enveloped by the spirit, your body can physically pass through walls.

Literalists also suggest ridiculous things like when God spoke at Christ's baptism, that it was a literal, booming voice from heaven.  Or other things which are simply not the case.

The Saints were limited to the science if their day and were not men of science. We can't expect them to be and we can't look to them as guides as to whether modern science is true or not.

If you refuse to believe this, then you can remain in the realm of stupid while we properly educate your kids and while we continue to interpret the scriptures properly and not remain hung up on the baby-food level of interpretation.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #68 on: November 01, 2012, 12:33:56 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #69 on: November 01, 2012, 12:57:46 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #70 on: November 01, 2012, 01:04:28 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

Bro I know you must be frustrated, but ad hominems aren't going to convince anyone.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #71 on: November 01, 2012, 01:17:55 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

Bro I know you must be frustrated, but ad hominems aren't going to convince anyone.

I used to be a fundamentalist, it wouldn't matter if I used ad hominems or not, fundies are so entrenched in their own Islamic-like interpretation and view of the Bible that they can't be reasoned with unless they are willing to accept other views.

Unfortunately, we've lost thousands of people in Christianity to atheism and agnosticism because they were brought up as fundamentalists, and suddenly discover that they were wrong, and instead of simply adapting their views, they've completely abandoned the faith. For fundamentalists, it is "all or nothing", there is no grey area, and so ad hominems don't help much, but they don't hurt any either, since they are already fanatical and stubborn.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #72 on: November 01, 2012, 01:22:58 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

Bro I know you must be frustrated, but ad hominems aren't going to convince anyone.

I used to be a fundamentalist, it wouldn't matter if I used ad hominems or not, fundies are so entrenched in their own Islamic-like interpretation and view of the Bible that they can't be reasoned with unless they are willing to accept other views.

Unfortunately, we've lost thousands of people in Christianity to atheism and agnosticism because they were brought up as fundamentalists, and suddenly discover that they were wrong, and instead of simply adapting their views, they've completely abandoned the faith. For fundamentalists, it is "all or nothing", there is no grey area, and so ad hominems don't help much, but they don't hurt any either, since they are already fanatical and stubborn.

Remember, you're posting on a public forum. Your harsh words might turn away someone who would otherwise be willing to listen to what you want to say.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #73 on: November 01, 2012, 01:40:19 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

ive already demonstrated to you that the Fathers not only accepted the literal level, but in fact warned against NOT accepting it. ill trust them on Scripture. you've pointed to Met. Kallistos and Dr. Jeannie, both of whom I respect, but who are not sufficient establish any position as being the Patristic tradition of 2000 years. you're only showing that some modern people are in disagreement with the Fathers.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 01:45:08 PM by jckstraw72 » Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #74 on: November 01, 2012, 01:41:13 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

Bro I know you must be frustrated, but ad hominems aren't going to convince anyone.

I used to be a fundamentalist, it wouldn't matter if I used ad hominems or not, fundies are so entrenched in their own Islamic-like interpretation and view of the Bible that they can't be reasoned with unless they are willing to accept other views.

Unfortunately, we've lost thousands of people in Christianity to atheism and agnosticism because they were brought up as fundamentalists, and suddenly discover that they were wrong, and instead of simply adapting their views, they've completely abandoned the faith. For fundamentalists, it is "all or nothing", there is no grey area, and so ad hominems don't help much, but they don't hurt any either, since they are already fanatical and stubborn.

if anyone on this thread is acting fanatical and stubborn it is surely you.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #75 on: November 01, 2012, 01:58:25 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

ive already demonstrated to you that the Fathers not only accepted the literal level, but in fact warned against NOT accepting it. ill trust them on Scripture. you've pointed to Met. Kallistos and Dr. Jeannie, both of whom I respect, but who are not sufficient establish any position as being the Patristic tradition of 2000 years. you're only showing that some modern people are in disagreement with the Fathers.

a couple quick questions: Do you believe in the Geocentric model? Why or why not?
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 02:00:12 PM by sheenj » Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,841



« Reply #76 on: November 01, 2012, 03:21:37 PM »

I'd like to know his opinion on the following ideas:
Geocentrism
Flat-Earth
Expanding Earth

I've read creationist accounts, I'm ashamed to admit that I was once a creationist and had plenty of literature on it (which I decided to give to my old Protestant Church, but now I wished I had burned it) and I will tell you that they don't have any good evidence on their side other than faulty biblical interpretation and very flawed scientific research.

I do not say God couldn't have done it in six days, I'm saying that he did not do it that way. We know for a fact that the universe is at the least 13.75 billion years old, and the earth is at least 4.54 billion years old, and Homo sapiens are at least only 200,000 years old. Those have been proven to be at the least, the yougest age of those things.

We know for a fact there was never a worldwide flood, and there isn't even enough water to cover the entire earth. We know there was probably a massive flood, but it wasn't worldwide.

God does not act against or contradict his own creation. He doesn't just step in and completely alter it at any point in time. We also do not have a "God of the gaps", you can't just insert God into any part of science you/we haven't discovered or understand.

You also cannot say that science contradicts scripture because it simply doesn't. Genesis is not to be taken literally and if you think it is, then that only shows you to be spiritually immature and your interpretation to be extremely clouded.

We aren't Protestants and we don't need Protestant ideas in our church. If you want to be a fundamentalist, find, but get out of the church and do it elsewhere. Join the Protestant fundie rednecks or the unorthodox schismatics like the "True Orthodox" fundamentalists, but don't treat Orthodoxy like it is a new place for you to insert your heretical Protestant fundamentalist views.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 03:23:46 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,565


« Reply #77 on: November 01, 2012, 04:48:11 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

ive already demonstrated to you that the Fathers not only accepted the literal level, but in fact warned against NOT accepting it. ill trust them on Scripture. you've pointed to Met. Kallistos and Dr. Jeannie, both of whom I respect, but who are not sufficient establish any position as being the Patristic tradition of 2000 years. you're only showing that some modern people are in disagreement with the Fathers.

a couple quick questions: Do you believe in the Geocentric model? Why or why not?
I don't see how changing the topic of discussion is useful.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,565


« Reply #78 on: November 01, 2012, 04:49:50 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.
And with this irrational burst of, whatever it is that ails you, I depart this thread.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #79 on: November 01, 2012, 04:58:36 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

ive already demonstrated to you that the Fathers not only accepted the literal level, but in fact warned against NOT accepting it. ill trust them on Scripture. you've pointed to Met. Kallistos and Dr. Jeannie, both of whom I respect, but who are not sufficient establish any position as being the Patristic tradition of 2000 years. you're only showing that some modern people are in disagreement with the Fathers.

a couple quick questions: Do you believe in the Geocentric model? Why or why not?
I don't see how changing the topic of discussion is useful.

The fathers were once unanimous in their approval of the Geocentric model, why do we not follow it anymore?
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,959


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #80 on: November 01, 2012, 07:43:16 PM »

your assumption that deeper levels of meaning negate the literal-historical level is false and un-Patristic. only rarely is the literal level done away with altogether, such as when the Scriptures use anthropomorphisms for God.

You're just plain stupid if you think we should interpret all scripture literally (except for the anthropomorphisms of God).

Maybe you should leave the Church and go back to the Protestant Fundamentalists? We don't need fundamentalist idiots here. You either give up your fundamentalism or get out. People like you are distorting the church.

I wished I could live to see the day when the fundies don't exist anymore. The world will be much better off.

ive already demonstrated to you that the Fathers not only accepted the literal level, but in fact warned against NOT accepting it. ill trust them on Scripture. you've pointed to Met. Kallistos and Dr. Jeannie, both of whom I respect, but who are not sufficient establish any position as being the Patristic tradition of 2000 years. you're only showing that some modern people are in disagreement with the Fathers.

a couple quick questions: Do you believe in the Geocentric model? Why or why not?
I don't see how changing the topic of discussion is useful.

The fathers were once unanimous in their approval of the Geocentric model, why do we not follow it anymore?

Proof?

Unanimity in the fathers is rare. If they're unanimous on a matter of science, it reflects the understanding of the time. I was under the impression that geocentrism was not unanimously believed by the ancients, but is rather a misunderstanding. It has more to do with Roman Catholic reading of Aristotle and humanism than with ancient science.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
akimori makoto
正義の剣
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #81 on: November 01, 2012, 07:59:53 PM »

This thread needs some clarification on what exactly "literal" means in the hermeneutic sense -- paging orthonorm.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
Ashman618
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukranian catholic
Jurisdiction: Philadelphia
Posts: 503



« Reply #82 on: November 01, 2012, 08:30:27 PM »

The fathers were just confused cuz the didn't realize the earth revolves around me Smiley
Logged
MichaelArchangelos
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Inquirer
Posts: 103



« Reply #83 on: November 01, 2012, 09:21:08 PM »


Wow, you really don't understand science or evolution. Please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, don't bring your Protestant Fundamentalism with you into Orthodoxy.

We aren't Protestants and we don't need Protestant ideas in our church. If you want to be a fundamentalist, find, but get out of the church and do it elsewhere. Join the Protestant fundie rednecks or the unorthodox schismatics like the "True Orthodox" fundamentalists, but don't treat Orthodoxy like it is a new place for you to insert your heretical Protestant fundamentalist views.


Since when is believing literally what the Bible says Protestant fundamentalism?I'm sure if you went back 200 years and asked any Orthodox priest if the world was created in six literal days, they would have said 'yes' without a doubt.

So you're basically saying that it's not possible for an Orthodox Christian to be a creationist and that all Orthodox Christians who believe in creation are heretics. Do you believe that it is not a valid theological opinion for an Orthodox Christian to hold?   

In the Orthodoxy Study Bible, the study notes on Creation say that with regard to evolution, the Orthodox Church has not dogmatised any particular view.

Quote
Move on to higher levels of interpretation and understand that the Bible isn't a scientific document and isn't a historical textbook.

Can you prove this from the Scripture or the Fathers?

Quote
Your point being? You do know that there are probably at least 1 or 2 Saints in our hagiography that probably didn't exist right?
How do you know they didn't exist?

Quote
Do you also believe that dragons exist?

Yes, I do. The modern world has created a new word for them - dinosaurs.

Quote
That mountains literally move from one spot to the other?

God can do anything.

Quote
God is not limited to human science.

This is exactly my point. God can do anything He chooses to, since He is omniscient. However, atheistic and materialistic scientists do limit themselves to human science and that's why they have to come up with ridiculous theories like evolutionism to explain how we got here.

Quote
1. We can deduce the speed of light from experiments and observations. (It's 300,000 meters per second)

2. We can use telescopes to see light from billions and billions of lightyears away. (Farthest observed: 13.14 Billion lightyears)

3. We can then conclude that there were objects in the Cosmos at least 13.14 Billion years ago.

There is no way the Cosmos are 7500 years old.

It's possible that the speed of light in the past was not the same as it is now. I have a book with a somewhat complex assessment of this very issue, and I can post the relevant chapter if you're interested.

Quote
No human is infallible except for Our Lord. What I was trying to say was that most of these saints you quote were speaking from a position of ignorance with regards to science.

Okay, so let's see what Our Lord said with regard to the creation of man.

"But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female." (Mark 10:6)

Now, according to the evolutionist world view, the universe is about 14 billion years old, and the earth is around 4.6 billion years old. Man only arose in the last few million years. Jesus said that God made man from the beginning, but evolutionism places billions of years between the 'beginning' and the 'evolution' of the first man.

This leaves us with a dilemma.
1. Was Jesus lying?
2. Was Jesus ignorant of modern science?
3. Was Jesus right?

If option 1 or option 2 is correct, then Jesus is not God. However, we have it on the best authority (the first 2 Ecumenical Councils) that Jesus Christ is indeed God. So therefore, the only logical answer is 3. Therefore, evolutionism is false. QED.

Quote
To say "science has been proven wrong" is also an incorrect statement. The theory of evolution is a theory which has the backing of a lot of data. It has not been proven wrong yet. At the same time, it has not been proven to the point of being a "law". Theories are not things that are inherently false, theories aren't guesses. Theories are things which have been discovered through a profound amount of measurable, observable data which has not yet been proven wrong.

Did you know that Darwin wrote his "theory" without any evidence? The only evidence that Darwin had was evidence of "micro-evolution" - variation among species. This is a scientific fact. However, macro-evolution - one kind of animal changing into another - has never been observed, tested and demonstrated, and therefore, is not scientific. If it had really happened, there would be thousands or millions of transitional fossils, which there aren't.

Evolutionists look at bones and fossils and when they see homologous features in different species, they claim that this is proof that they had a common ancestor. However, there is another explanation - they had a common designer.

Quote
The earth is not flat

The Bible never says it is.

Quote
the earth is not the physical center of the universe

How do you know? You haven't explored the entire universe and plotted a map of it. The earth could very well be at the centre of the universe.

Quote
the earth is not only 6.000 years old

If man had been here on earth for millions of years, the earth would be overpopulated, even with a ridiculously small population growth rate.

Quote
the earth doesn't have water suspended literally below and above

It's possible that there used to be a water canopy over the earth, but it was destroyed in the flood. Kent Hovind puts forwards some compelling evidence for a water canopy in his second creation seminar.

Quote
the sun and other planets do NOT revolve around the earth

The Bible never says they do.

Quote
We know for a fact there was never a worldwide flood, and there isn't even enough water to cover the entire earth. We know there was probably a massive flood, but it wasn't worldwide.

Seashells have been found near the top of Mount Everest. It must have been underwater at some point. Dr Walter Brown puts forward some compelling evidence for the Flood in his book In the Begining.

Quote
You also cannot say that science contradicts scripture because it simply doesn't. Genesis is not to be taken literally and if you think it is, then that only shows you to be spiritually immature and your interpretation to be extremely clouded.

Jckstraw has provided sufficient quotes from the Fathers to show that Scripture is to be interpreted literally. I presume you have Scriptural or Patristic quotes to prove your point.
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,183



« Reply #84 on: November 01, 2012, 09:58:22 PM »

I am calling for recess. To be resumed after the election. Thanks, Carl Kraeff
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
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 0.269 seconds with 112 queries.