OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 01:08:55 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: How to Interpret the Scriptures  (Read 5709 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« on: April 16, 2013, 03:13:08 AM »

It's roots are in the bible.[Refer 1 Corinthians 15 v 51-52]

Not necessarily. The thing is, the only reason people find "roots" for the rapture in the Bible is because they go into reading the Bible assuming that the rapture is already true, thus, it has a placebo affect of them finding "evidence" for a proposition they already assume is true. And oftentimes, this "evidence" is taken out of context and twisted.

It is true that no-one comes to such an issue as a blank canvas, there are always predisposing factors. But that is the problem with this argument - it is just as true of you as it is of me!

Quote
Quote
believing anything I am 'told' to believe by Protestant, Orthodox or Roman Catholic churches whether the preacher is old or young or indeed whether they are ranting and raving or calm in their delivery of the message. We are to test whether what is preached concurs with God's word. If it does not, then it is false teaching.

You trust your own judgment over God's Church,
I'm not sure where you get this idea from anything I've said. The Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture surely? The Bible indicates that I am to be like the Bereans and search it for the truth. I believe you were the one who declared that it contained 'all truth'. So, I don't need to trust my own fallible judgement, I can trust the Bible.

Quote
likewise, the Bible is not God's "word". Normally I'd go into more detail, but, I'm kinda lazy in my apologetics this morning.
well, again, it tells us that, "all scripture is Spirit-breathed". That would seem to make it the Word of God!
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,998


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2013, 03:28:41 AM »

It is true that no-one comes to such an issue as a blank canvas, there are always predisposing factors. But that is the problem with this argument - it is just as true of you as it is of me!

The difference is that mine is rooted in the authoritive teaching of the Church and I try to conform it to the patristics. Yours on the other hand is rooted in heresy. Now I don't mean this offensively; I have nothing against you. But your beliefs I indeed see has harmful and heretical.

Quote
The Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture surely?

Sorta-Kinda-Not-in-the-same-way-as-you-think. It's a topic for another thread.

Quote
The Bible indicates that I am to be like the Bereans and search it for the truth.

St. Paul also says to conform to the Church and adhere to the traditions and teachings of the Apostles  Wink Your search for the truth should be more about submission to the Church opposed to disliking something because you don't like it.

Quote
I believe you were the one who declared that it contained 'all truth'.

No I didn't. The Orthodox Church does not accept Sola Scriptura.

Quote
So, I don't need to trust my own fallible judgement, I can trust the Bible.

Trusting the Bible without the Church is trusting in your own fallible judgement. The Bible was meant to be understood in the context of the Church and is only properly understood in the Church. Hence why St. Paul calls the Church the "...pillar and ground of the truth," (1 Tim. 3:15), not the Bible.

Quote
...well, again, it tells us that, "all scripture is Spirit-breathed". That would seem to make it the Word of God!

Maybe in its own way. But not when you understand the prologue to the Gospel of John as referring to the Bible. That's simply rooted in total ignorance of Greek.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 03:29:19 AM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2013, 04:22:09 AM »

It is true that no-one comes to such an issue as a blank canvas, there are always predisposing factors. But that is the problem with this argument - it is just as true of you as it is of me!

The difference is that mine is rooted in the authoritive teaching of the Church and I try to conform it to the patristics. Yours on the other hand is rooted in heresy. Now I don't mean this offensively; I have nothing against you. But your beliefs I indeed see has harmful and heretical.

when you see me depart from the authoritative teaching of the Bible, you may pounce on it.

Quote
The Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture surely?

Quote
Sorta-Kinda-Not-in-the-same-way-as-you-think. It's a topic for another thread.

why? It is critical to this discussion. I'm sure it's a very simple thing for you to confirm that the Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture!

Quote
Quote
The Bible indicates that I am to be like the Bereans and search it for the truth.

St. Paul also says to conform to the Church and adhere to the traditions and teachings of the Apostles  Wink Your search for the truth should be more about submission to the Church opposed to disliking something because you don't like it.

well, this is simple, the Holy Spirit has seen to it that the teachings of the Apostles are set down in the Bible - I have no problem with that. Jesus tells me to, "call no-one master on earth". So all my submission is to be to his Holy Spirit.

Quote
Quote
I believe you were the one who declared that it contained 'all truth'.

No I didn't. The Orthodox Church does not accept Sola Scriptura.

so when scripture tells the Orthodox Church that "all scripture is Spirit-breathed", the Orthodox Church believes that God lied?

Quote
Quote
So, I don't need to trust my own fallible judgement, I can trust the Bible.

Trusting the Bible without the Church is trusting in your own fallible judgement.

not so, because the Bible promises that the Holy Spirit will, "lead [me] into all truth". So I don't have to rely on myself. After all, the Church is only a collection of human opinions unless it is also infallibly led of the Spirit. The indication in  scripture is that this is not so.   

Quote
The Bible was meant to be understood in the context of the Church and is only properly understood in the Church. Hence why St. Paul calls the Church the "...pillar and ground of the truth," (1 Tim. 3:15), not the Bible.

I refer you to Christ's Letters to the Churches. As the Church consists [by scriptural definition] of those who are indwelt of the Spirit, Paul was correct.

Quote
Quote
...well, again, it tells us that, "all scripture is Spirit-breathed". That would seem to make it the Word of God!

Maybe in its own way.

what does this mean?
 
Quote
But not when you understand the prologue to the Gospel of John as referring to the Bible. That's simply rooted in total ignorance of Greek.
no I love and believe the opening of John. It also is true.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2013, 04:34:29 AM »

It is true that no-one comes to such an issue as a blank canvas, there are always predisposing factors. But that is the problem with this argument - it is just as true of you as it is of me!

The difference is that mine is rooted in the authoritive teaching of the Church and I try to conform it to the patristics. Yours on the other hand is rooted in heresy. Now I don't mean this offensively; I have nothing against you. But your beliefs I indeed see has harmful and heretical.

when you see me depart from the authoritative teaching of the Bible, you may pounce on it.

Quote
The Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture surely?

Quote
Sorta-Kinda-Not-in-the-same-way-as-you-think. It's a topic for another thread.

why? It is critical to this discussion. I'm sure it's a very simple thing for you to confirm that the Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture!

Quote
Quote
The Bible indicates that I am to be like the Bereans and search it for the truth.

St. Paul also says to conform to the Church and adhere to the traditions and teachings of the Apostles  Wink Your search for the truth should be more about submission to the Church opposed to disliking something because you don't like it.

well, this is simple, the Holy Spirit has seen to it that the teachings of the Apostles are set down in the Bible - I have no problem with that. Jesus tells me to, "call no-one master on earth". So all my submission is to be to his Holy Spirit.

Quote
Quote
I believe you were the one who declared that it contained 'all truth'.

No I didn't. The Orthodox Church does not accept Sola Scriptura.

so when scripture tells the Orthodox Church that "all scripture is Spirit-breathed", the Orthodox Church believes that God lied?

Quote
Quote
So, I don't need to trust my own fallible judgement, I can trust the Bible.

Trusting the Bible without the Church is trusting in your own fallible judgement.

not so, because the Bible promises that the Holy Spirit will, "lead [me] into all truth". So I don't have to rely on myself. After all, the Church is only a collection of human opinions unless it is also infallibly led of the Spirit. The indication in  scripture is that this is not so.   

Quote
The Bible was meant to be understood in the context of the Church and is only properly understood in the Church. Hence why St. Paul calls the Church the "...pillar and ground of the truth," (1 Tim. 3:15), not the Bible.

I refer you to Christ's Letters to the Churches. As the Church consists [by scriptural definition] of those who are indwelt of the Spirit, Paul was correct.

Quote
Quote
...well, again, it tells us that, "all scripture is Spirit-breathed". That would seem to make it the Word of God!

Maybe in its own way.

what does this mean?
 
Quote
But not when you understand the prologue to the Gospel of John as referring to the Bible. That's simply rooted in total ignorance of Greek.
no I love and believe the opening of John. It also is true.

You only have to look at reality in order to see the dangers in reading the scriptures alone. There are thousands of people, who says the exact same things that you say, but still reach totally different conclusions. The Church is needed in order to interpretate the Scriptures.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2013, 04:53:24 AM »

I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?



Selam


« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 04:53:50 AM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
jmbejdl
Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava


« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2013, 04:55:17 AM »

when you see me depart from the authoritative teaching of the Bible, you may pounce on it.

I'm not James (well, I am but not the same one) but I'd like to try and answer some of your points. First I'd point out that no text can be understood devoid of a context. There is, therefore, no plain meaning to Scripture. I'd certainly argue that you depart from the teaching of Scripture if you adhere to Dispensationalism. My context for reading Scripture is the Holy Tradition of the Church, yours is something else, something much newer. Why is it that you prefer a post-reformation tradition to the Tradition in which the Scripture was compiled? Or is it that you simply don't recognise that you adhere to such a tradition at all? (Note that I'm an ex-Protestant and have had to find answers to such questions myself).

Quote
why? It is critical to this discussion. I'm sure it's a very simple thing for you to confirm that the Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture!
It depends what you mean by inerrancy. If you mean are there no errors of any kind in Scripture, no. If you mean that Scripture is infallible with regards to doctrine, yes, but then you still have to interpret it via the mind of Church, not any old way you like.

Quote
well, this is simple, the Holy Spirit has seen to it that the teachings of the Apostles are set down in the Bible - I have no problem with that. Jesus tells me to, "call no-one master on earth". So all my submission is to be to his Holy Spirit.

And yet the Church never understood Scripture in that way before the Reformation and you see nothing odd in that? Could you show me where Scripture tells you that each individual will be guided in understanding Scripture by the Holy Spirit? I don't seem to recall such a passage.

Quote
so when scripture tells the Orthodox Church that "all scripture is Spirit-breathed", the Orthodox Church believes that God lied?
What was the Scripture at the time that that was written? I don't think God lied, and nor does any Orthodox Christian but it often seems to me that Protestants do. Might I ask whether your canon of Scripture includes all of the OT books contained in the Septuagint? I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but I'd rather not assume too much.

Quote
not so, because the Bible promises that the Holy Spirit will, "lead [me] into all truth". So I don't have to rely on myself. After all, the Church is only a collection of human opinions unless it is also infallibly led of the Spirit. The indication in  scripture is that this is not so.   
No it doesn't. It witnesses to Christ's promise to the Apostles that the Holy Spirit would lead them collectively into all Truth - i.e. that He would lead the Church into all truth. We would certainly never deny that, but you clearly rely on your own (actually more like someone else's) tradition even to interpret that passage in the way that you do, contrary to the Tradition of the Church. Do you not see a hint of irony there?

Quote

I refer you to Christ's Letters to the Churches. As the Church consists [by scriptural definition] of those who are indwelt of the Spirit, Paul was correct.
The Church is a community, not an individual. Your tradition seems to be telling you that you can reinterpret references to the Church as references to you as an individual. This is not, however, the Tradition that led to the canon of Scripture in the first place. It is, in fact, quite new. What makes you think that whichever post-Reformation teachers you hold dear understood Scripture better than those Fathers in the early centuries who were involved with defining the canon?

James
Logged

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

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2013, 05:45:41 AM »



You only have to look at reality in order to see the dangers in reading the scriptures alone.

this statement appears to suggest that it is dangerous to trust the Holy Spirit!

Quote
There are thousands of people, who says the exact same things that you say, but still reach totally different conclusions.

other people are responsible to Jesus for their obedience or otherwise.
Quote
The Church is needed in order to interpretate the Scriptures.
but not only is this not supported by scripture but the Lord details the failings of the church very explicitly.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2013, 06:18:52 AM »

Quote
this statement appears to suggest that it is dangerous to trust the Holy Spirit!

The Holy Spirit work in the Church. You cannot separate yourself from the Church. The Body of Christ is one, visible Church.

Quote
other people are responsible to Jesus for their obedience or otherwise.

So are you and I. Paul states that even if an angel of light should preach to you something different than what the Apostles taught, accursed be he. What the Churches teaches is not just the teachings of men ´, it is the teachings of God. There is no reason to try and come up with new alternatives to that which the Church has already defined.

Quote
but not only is this not supported by scripture but the Lord details the failings of the church very explicitly

Quote
14These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: 15But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
1 Timothy 3

The early Church had bishops, the early Church had councils and the early Church was guided by the Holy Spirit, just as it is today.


Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2013, 06:25:04 AM »

***BUMP***



I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?



Selam



Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2013, 07:04:23 AM »

when you see me depart from the authoritative teaching of the Bible, you may pounce on it.

I'm not James (well, I am but not the same one) but I'd like to try and answer some of your points.

hi James!

Quote
First I'd point out that no text can be understood devoid of a context.

context is important to exegesis.
Quote
There is, therefore, no plain meaning to Scripture.

this doesn't follow from your statement above. Are you suggesting that God didn't intend to communicate with ALL his people?
 
Quote
I'd certainly argue that you depart from the teaching of Scripture if you adhere to Dispensationalism.

you are more than welcome to argue this.

 
Quote
My context for reading Scripture is the Holy Tradition of the Church, yours is something else, something much newer.

my context for reading the scripture, the writings of the Apostles, is God-given rationality in strict subjection to the Lordship of the Holy Spirit. I think this is as old as it gets.

 
Quote
Why is it that you prefer a post-reformation tradition to the Tradition in which the Scripture was compiled?

I prefer the plain sense of scripture under the Spirit's leading ie if there's something I don't understand, I ask him. Jesus tells me to beware of men's traditions.

Quote
Or is it that you simply don't recognise that you adhere to such a tradition at all? (Note that I'm an ex-Protestant and have had to find answers to such questions myself).

you are free to point it out and indicate where it departs from scripture.

Quote
Quote
why? It is critical to this discussion. I'm sure it's a very simple thing for you to confirm that the Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture!
It depends what you mean by inerrancy. If you mean are there no errors of any kind in Scripture, no.

so you believe that God lies or that he has a poor eye for detail?

Quote
If you mean that Scripture is infallible with regards to doctrine, yes, but then you still have to interpret it via the mind of Church, not any old way you like.

ok, and where does scripture tell you this? And is "any old way the Spirit likes" not ok?

Quote
well, this is simple, the Holy Spirit has seen to it that the teachings of the Apostles are set down in the Bible - I have no problem with that. Jesus tells me to, "call no-one master on earth". So all my submission is to be to his Holy Spirit.

Quote
And yet the Church never understood Scripture in that way before the Reformation and you see nothing odd in that?
well it must have because I've said nothing that isn't scriptural .           

Quote
Could you show me where Scripture tells you that each individual will be guided in understanding Scripture by the Holy Spirit? I don't seem to recall such a passage.

John 16:13
But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.
John 16:12-14 (in Context)

Quote
Quote
so when scripture tells the Orthodox Church that "all scripture is Spirit-breathed", the Orthodox Church believes that God lied?
What was the Scripture at the time that that was written? I don't think God lied, and nor does any Orthodox Christian

why is this significant? Scripture itself tells you that, "scripture cannot be broken!

Quote
but it often seems to me that Protestants do.

no doubt both are still capable of sin, did you have anything in mind?

Quote
Might I ask whether your canon of Scripture includes all of the OT books contained in the Septuagint? I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but I'd rather not assume too much.

no, assumptions are dangerous. I have many Bibles, including the Septuagint. When I evince an inconsistency, you may point it out.

Quote
Quote
not so, because the Bible promises that the Holy Spirit will, "lead [me] into all truth". So I don't have to rely on myself. After all, the Church is only a collection of human opinions unless it is also infallibly led of the Spirit. The indication in  scripture is that this is not so.   
No it doesn't. It witnesses to Christ's promise to the Apostles that the Holy Spirit would lead them collectively into all Truth - i.e. that He would lead the Church into all truth.
you would need to prove that this was his intention and there is no indication that it was. Furthermore, the consequence of this, were it  true, would be irrational since the Spirit indwells every redeemed person thus you are asserting that the Spirit in ME will NOT lead me into truth but the Spirit in some arbitrary, nebulous quorum WILL. Whyever would the Spirit withhold truth from his child? Is THAT your concept of God?!!

Quote
We would certainly never deny that, but you clearly rely on your own (actually more like someone else's)

were you wishing to gently insult my intelligence?! I could say the same of you - there is little new under the sun; we all make choices.

Quote
tradition even to interpret that passage in the way that you do, contrary to the Tradition of the Church. Do you not see a hint of irony there?

if there is a "tradition" of being led by the Spirit, I'll sign up to it.

Quote
Quote
I refer you to Christ's Letters to the Churches. As the Church consists [by scriptural definition] of those who are indwelt of the Spirit, Paul was correct.
The Church is a community, not an individual.

this is not disputed.
 
Quote
Your tradition seems to be telling you that you can reinterpret references to the Church as references to you as an individual.
This is not, however, the Tradition that led to the canon of Scripture in the first place. It is, in fact, quite new.

this is fine as an assertion but you have yet to substantiate it

Quote
What makes you think that whichever post-Reformation teachers you hold dear understood Scripture better than those Fathers in the early centuries who were involved with defining the canon?

this would rather depend on who was indwelt of the Spirit and who wasn't. However, it may surprise you that I don't regard it as highly significant. Do you think God is not capable of establishing his will?
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2013, 07:31:38 AM »

***BUMP***



I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

thank you Gebre!

Quote
1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

there is one baptism, which is not for the remission of sins.

Quote
2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?

the Holy Spirit.

Selam!



Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
therovingmethodist
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 137


A very bad Christian


« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2013, 07:48:36 AM »

Rachel, the thing about being "led by the Spirit" is that two people can have completely opposite interpretations of the same thing and both sincerely believe that they are being "led by the Spirit." The Spirit does not lie nor is the Spirit schizophrenic, so obviously somebody was deceived. Every heretic has been sincere in their error. Thus this is why we trust in the Church being led by the Holy Spirit, because the Lord himself said the gates of Hell shall not prevail against her.
Logged

"One Bishop to rule them all, One Bishop to find them, One Bishop to bring them all and in the darkness bind them"
-Kostac
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2013, 07:52:00 AM »

Quote
Well he obviously wants us to understand something of himself. Why do you think he says, "come let us reason together...." if this is an impossibility and he is completely beyond human reason. Why reveal himself to us at all if we cannot understand?

We can understand what God reveals to us, by the Grace of the Holy Spirit, but not the fullness, the essence of God.

we don't understand God exhaustively because he is infinite.

Quote
Do you believe that the bible is intended to communicate true, reasonable propositions?
 

Quote
Quote
.The Bible presupposes the faith of the reader. It is a faith document—not science, philosophy, history, archaeology, literature, ideology, or biography. Because of its origins and usage in the community of faith, it does not attempt to establish its own authenticity or to prove its basic assumptions. It was not intended as a logical proof for the existence of God or for the reality of that to which it attests
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Holy_Scripture

the first sentence is untrue. If the Bible presupposed the faith of the reader IN GOD, there would be no Gospel.   

Quote
Quote
How are we to find answers if they are not understandable? God is obviously not limited in what he is able to do but that does not make his acts irrational. Do you mean that the answers that we find would be absurd?
Mark 12:30
And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment.
God is not expecting us to discard rational thought.

Of course we should not discard rational thought, but human reason and divine reason is different.

they are different because that of God is infinite.

Quote
Quote
Well Christ is responsible for our salvation through his death and resurrection. All who accept his gift of salvation are the 'bride of Christ.'
Many early heretics also accepted the Gift of Salvation, but that didn't stop the Church from excommunicate them.

which suggests that one should not trust the church!

Quote
As to the original topic, the Orthodox Church doesn't accept the teachings about the rapture, as presented by some modern protestant denominations.

on its behalf, please demonstrate this to be Biblical.

 
Quote
The Holy scriptures clearly states, that christians will have to go through tribulations before the Second Coming of Christ.

this is true. Why does this show the rapture to be unBiblical?
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2013, 07:58:26 AM »

Rachel, the thing about being "led by the Spirit" is that two people can have completely opposite interpretations of the same thing and both sincerely believe that they are being "led by the Spirit." The Spirit does not lie nor is the Spirit schizophrenic, so obviously somebody was deceived. Every heretic has been sincere in their error. Thus this is why we trust in the Church being led by the Holy Spirit, because the Lord himself said the gates of Hell shall not prevail against her.

if you mean, 'opposite interpretations' of scripture, one will be demonstrably inconsistent with other scripture and thus irrational. The Spirit never contradicts scripture. Scripture tells you that churches are not to  be trusted!
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 16, 2013, 08:05:45 AM »

***BUMP***



I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

thank you Gebre!

Quote
1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

there is one baptism, which is not for the remission of sins.

Quote
2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?

the Holy Spirit.




Thank you for answering my questions. But I'm not sure I understand your response to my first question. Do you accept the Nicene Creed in its fullness or do you only accept parts of it (or none of it?)

As for your answer to the second question, therein is the fundamental point of departure between your personal interpretation of Christianity and the Orthodox Christian Faith. If you accept the inerrancy of the Bible, then you must accept that the Bible nowhere states that scripture alone or the Holy Spirit alone (or a combination of the two) is the foundation of truth. In fact, I Timothy 3:15 clearly states that "the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth." Scripture also clearly states that "no scripture is a matter of individual interpretation." [II Peter 1:20]

So, with respect (and I don't mean to sound rude or condescending), unless you accept the proper foundational authority of Christian belief, then there is no point in discussing doctrine or theology with you. It will inevitably turn into a proof texting contest, and that could go on ad infinitum with nothing resolved. We can never agree if we are starting from two fundamentally different foundations.

So, you are faced with the same crucial choice that all of us who are converts from Protestantism were once faced with: Will you continue to lean upon your own fallible interpretations of holy scripture, or will you trust the Church through which the scriptures came to us? Will you cling to your own finite understanding of the Bible while claiming that the Holy Spirit is guiding you, or will you truly trust in the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who works in and through the Church that Our Lord instituted for our spiritual guidance, strength, and protection?

I hope that you will consider this choice carefully, soberly, and prayerfully.

The peace of Our Lord be with you.


Selam
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 08:10:04 AM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
jmbejdl
Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava


« Reply #15 on: April 16, 2013, 08:52:56 AM »

context is important to exegesis.
No, it's more than that. Every author writes within a context and every reader interprets the written word according to a context. There simply is no 'plain meaning' of Scripture.
 
Quote
this doesn't follow from your statement above. Are you suggesting that God didn't intend to communicate with ALL his people?
No, I'm saying that no text has a 'plain meaning'. Scripture is a collection of texts written and collected in a particular context. It's not direct dictation from God but the written witness of inspired men. If you want to understand what an author meant you need to try to understand it in the context it was written in - this is why I adhere to the Holy Tradition of the Church rather than the tradition of the Reformers.

Quote
my context for reading the scripture, the writings of the Apostles, is God-given rationality in strict subjection to the Lordship of the Holy Spirit. I think this is as old as it gets.
If that is indeed the case, why is that we don't see any of the early Fathers agreeing with your reading of Scripture? Surely if yours is the older interpretation it should be evidenced in the early centuries of the Church? If, in fact, you believe that it is, could you perhaps cite some examples?

Quote
I prefer the plain sense of scripture under the Spirit's leading ie if there's something I don't understand, I ask him. Jesus tells me to beware of men's traditions.
As I said, no text has a plain meaning. But I'd note that Holy Tradition is not 'men's traditions' (that's what I'd arguing your modern tradition is, in fact) but the faith as delivered to the Apostles. The same tradition that St. Paul admonishes us to hold to, whether written or by word of mouth.

Quote

you are free to point it out and indicate where it departs from scripture.
Well your apparent adherence to the two solas would be good starting points.

Quote
so you believe that God lies or that he has a poor eye for detail?
Neither. Do you think that Scripture is the direct dictation of God? If so, which version? The idea that Scripture written by human authors (inspired, yes, but still fallible human) could contain inconsequential errors should be hardly difficult to appreciate. Then you've got copyists and translators and the opportunity for error only increases. We don't have any of the original manuscripts, after all.

Quote
ok, and where does scripture tell you this? And is "any old way the Spirit likes" not ok?
Scripture tells me the Church is the pillar and ground of the Truth. That Church (my Church) collected the Canon of Scripture as the yardstick by which all doctrine should be measured. That's more than good enough for me. In a similar vein, though, and as you clearly hold Scripture not Church as the ultimate authority, where does Scripture tell you what Scripture is?

Quote
well, this is simple, the Holy Spirit has seen to it that the teachings of the Apostles are set down in the Bible - I have no problem with that. Jesus tells me to, "call no-one master on earth". So all my submission is to be to his Holy Spirit.

All of them? You think everything that the Apostles taught is written down in Scripture? Submitting to the Church, whose head is Christ is not submitting to man, but to Christ.

Quote
well it must have because I've said nothing that isn't scriptural . 
If you believe this to be the case, I repeat my invitation for you to find early Fathers who interpreted Scripture as you do.         

Quote
John 16:13
But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.
John 16:12-14 (in Context)

So, by what tradition do you interpret this, contrary to the clear context of the text, to apply to you as an individual rather than the group of Apostles that Christ addressed? Because the 'plain meaning' of that text insofar as such a thing can even exist at all, certainly does not say anything of the Holy Spirit guiding individuals as they read Scripture, which was my question. And where does the episode with Philip and the Eunuch in Acts 8 leave your interpretation? Because it seems to me that it quite roundly refutes your position on individual interpretation.

Quote
why is this significant? Scripture itself tells you that, "scripture cannot be broken!
It's significant because as written 'all scripture' cannot include the NT but most certainly did include the whole Septuagint

Quote
no doubt both are still capable of sin, did you have anything in mind?
Yes, the fact that most Protestants do not accept the so-called 'Apocrypha' as part of the Canon of Scripture.

Quote
no, assumptions are dangerous. I have many Bibles, including the Septuagint. When I evince an inconsistency, you may point it out.
You didn't really answer what I was getting at, though. My question could have been clearer. I own plenty of books that I do not consider Scripture. Some, such as the Didache, are spiritually valuable but not Scripture. Do you consider the so-called 'Apocrypha' to be Scripture or more like how I consider the Didache (or perhaps something else entirely)?

Quote
you would need to prove that this was his intention and there is no indication that it was. Furthermore, the consequence of this, were it  true, would be irrational since the Spirit indwells every redeemed person thus you are asserting that the Spirit in ME will NOT lead me into truth but the Spirit in some arbitrary, nebulous quorum WILL. Whyever would the Spirit withhold truth from his child? Is THAT your concept of God?!!
In all honesty, the context of the passage argues so clearly for my interpretation of the passage that the only way you can get to your interpretation is to read your tradition into it. There's no way that you can claim to be going by the 'plain meaning' in this instant, so I'd say the onus is on you to explain why you read as you do. I'm saying that Christ claimed to be with us wherever we gather in His name (quite hard for an individual to gather) and He founded a Church with Himself as head which would be the pillar and ground of the Truth. He didn't promise to guide every individual believer to the Truth (and had He done so a quick look at the doctrinal differences in modern - especially Protestant - Christendom would be enough to show it for a lie). How do you distinguish between what the Spirit tells you and what you suppose for yourself? I turn to the mind of the Church. I'm not saying the Spirit lies, but you can certainly lie to yourself as any of us can.

Quote

were you wishing to gently insult my intelligence?! I could say the same of you - there is little new under the sun; we all make choices.
No. I've been (more or less) where you are and I was as intelligent then as I am now, I was just misguided. I was just trying to point out that you too adhere to a tradition. Everyone does. The question is which one to choose. I choose the one that I can see evidenced by the saints since the earliest centuries over a tradition that traces it's origins to the reforms of 500 years ago. I always will.

Quote
if there is a "tradition" of being led by the Spirit, I'll sign up to it.

There is but it's quite recent compared with the age of the Church.

Quote
this is not disputed.
Really? You consider the Church to be a community? I thought you'd just described it as a 'nebulous quorum' above?

Quote
this would rather depend on who was indwelt of the Spirit and who wasn't. However, it may surprise you that I don't regard it as highly significant. Do you think God is not capable of establishing his will?

Seeing as you effectively claimed that the Church consists of those who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, are you seriously suggesting that all the Church Fathers were outside of the Church while the Reformers were in? I don't want to put words in your mouth but that would appear to be the meaning behind what you have written. Please could you clarify? Of course I think God is capable of establishing His will. I just think that when He tells us that He is going to establish the Church as the pillar and ground of the Truth, that probably tells us the method He will use to do so.

James
Logged

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

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #16 on: April 16, 2013, 09:00:26 AM »

Quote
Well he obviously wants us to understand something of himself. Why do you think he says, "come let us reason together...." if this is an impossibility and he is completely beyond human reason. Why reveal himself to us at all if we cannot understand?

We can understand what God reveals to us, by the Grace of the Holy Spirit, but not the fullness, the essence of God.

we don't understand God exhaustively because he is infinite.

Quote
Do you believe that the bible is intended to communicate true, reasonable propositions?
 

Quote
Quote
.The Bible presupposes the faith of the reader. It is a faith document—not science, philosophy, history, archaeology, literature, ideology, or biography. Because of its origins and usage in the community of faith, it does not attempt to establish its own authenticity or to prove its basic assumptions. It was not intended as a logical proof for the existence of God or for the reality of that to which it attests
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Holy_Scripture

the first sentence is untrue. If the Bible presupposed the faith of the reader IN GOD, there would be no Gospel.   
The Gospel is in the Bible.

Quote
Quote
Quote
Well Christ is responsible for our salvation through his death and resurrection. All who accept his gift of salvation are the 'bride of Christ.'
Many early heretics also accepted the Gift of Salvation, but that didn't stop the Church from excommunicate them.

which suggests that one should not trust the church!
No, it means the opposite. Christ promised that the gates of Hell should never prevail against the Church, therefore, the visible Church must exist today, and does so.

Quote
As to the original topic, the Orthodox Church doesn't accept the teachings about the rapture, as presented by some modern protestant denominations.

Quote
on its behalf, please demonstrate this to be Biblical.

The belief that many protestants today hold, is that the righteous will be raptured before the coming of Antichrist. There is nothing in scripture that suggest this.

 
Quote
The Holy scriptures clearly states, that christians will have to go through tribulations before the Second Coming of Christ.
Quote

this is true. Why does this show the rapture to be unBiblical?

It shows that the above mentioned is false. I think we actually agree on most points concerning this, but the Church has never used the term to describe the Second Coming of Christ and therefore, we don't use it.

Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,937



« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2013, 01:22:06 PM »

Hi Rachel! Welcome to our humble corner of the internet. There seems to be many people in this discussion, so I hesitate to add another voice, but I do have some questions for you.

1.  If we are to rely on the Holy Spirit for guidance, why are there so many people will so many different opinions on what Scripture says?  Would you argue that you are right and to the extent that other people disagree with you, they are wrong?  Why doesn't the Holy Spirit lead people to the same conclusion?

2.  If as Paul states, that the Church is the pillar of Truth, what Church can we go to in order to gain this Truth?  If the gates of hell can never prevail against the Church that is the pillar of Truth, does that mean that the correct Church is one that has been around since the very beginning and can show that it has always taught the same thing since the time of the Apostles?  

3.  If someone were to read all of the writings of the early Church and see that what they teach are consistently not in line with what we now interpret from our 21st century mindset reading of Scripture, should we be willing to exercise enough humility to accept that perhaps we are not interpreting things properly and maybe we should listen to the writings of those who lived very close to the time of Christ and the Apostles?

4.  How do we know that the books that are in the Bible are the right ones?  If the Holy Spirit spoke to the men at Nicea and told them which books to put in the Bible, why would we not trust that the Holy Spirit also guided them in other matters as well?

I hope this is not too many questions as I don't want to overwhelm you, but I am curious as to your thoughts on these questions.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 01:24:34 PM by TheTrisagion » Logged

Why can't you just take your spiritual edification like a man? 
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,998


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2013, 03:15:22 PM »

when you see me depart from the authoritative teaching of the Bible, you may pounce on it.

You already have by rejecting the Church

Quote
why? It is critical to this discussion. I'm sure it's a very simple thing for you to confirm that the Orthodox Church holds to the inerrancy of scripture!

We believe that the Scripture is inspired and useful for salvation, but not that it is the only source of doctrinal knowledge.

Quote
well, this is simple, the Holy Spirit has seen to it that the teachings of the Apostles are set down in the Bible - I have no problem with that. Jesus tells me to, "call no-one master on earth". So all my submission is to be to his Holy Spirit.

All of the teachings of the Apostles are not set down in the Bible. Otherwise St. Paul wouldn't have told us to adhere to the "...traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle." (2 Thess. 2:15). St. John also tells us "And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book..." (John. 20:30) and "...there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written," (John. 21:35). Plus, you also have the fact that St. Paul references various "lost" epistles that he previously wrote but are not in the New Testament. In Corinthians, St. Paul alludes to at least one or two "lost" epistles that are not in the Bible. Tell me, if they were found, would you consider them to be Scripture? This presents a huge challenge to advocates of Sola Scriptura. Also, anyone with basic philological understanding will notice that Bible was not written as a fully comprehensive, manual to the Christian faith, rather, it's a series of documents that addressed various problems and questions which arose ABOUT the faith that the Church already knew. Going off topic, I've noticed that many Americans don't pay enough attention to philology and the literary techniques of a document--this is especially evident in American Protestants' interpretations of the Bible, where, they generally ignore concepts such as hyperbole, allegory, metaphor and rhetoric. I met one fellow before who truly believed that we were only supposed to forgive people 77 times, opposed to infinitely.

Quote
so when scripture tells the Orthodox Church that "all scripture is Spirit-breathed", the Orthodox Church believes that God lied?

No. We believe that it is "spirit-breathed" and "profitable" and all that other stuff, but that it is NOT the only source of doctrinal knowledge. This is something I don't get about Sola Scriptura; so many of these Protestant arguments for it quote scriptures that merely glorify how great the scriptures are, yet, they say nothing about scripture only/ I don't get how "spirit-breathed" automatically means "scripture only."

Quote
not so, because the Bible promises that the Holy Spirit will, "lead [me] into all truth".

Yes so. St. Paul says himself that "I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." (1 Tim. 3:15). The Bible was meant for the Church and meant to be understood through the lense of the Church. There is no escaping that fact. Also, unless the "Holy Spirit" leads you into the truth that is found in the Church, then, you are not being led by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit leads you into unity with the Church and into submission with the teachings of the Apostles. Once again in the words of St. Paul "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment," (1 Cor. 1:10) and to "...stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle," (2 Thess. 2:15). Unless you are being led into submission to the tradition of the Apostles and into the same mind and judgment as the Church, then you are not being led by the Holy Spirit. Anything contrary to the faith given by the Apostles is heresy and ought to be discarded. "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed," (Galatians 1:8-9), and "But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us," (2 Thess. 3:6). If you don't walk according to the Apostles' teachings which are found in the Church, then, there is no easy way to put it, but, you are accursed.

Quote
...the Church is only a collection of human opinions

Opinions of the Apostles who were led by God and carried special authority  Wink

Quote
...unless it is also infallibly led of the Spirit. The indication in  scripture is that this is not so.

Would St. Paul call it the "pillar and ground of the truth," if it weren't? Plus, Jesus said that "...the gates of Hades shall not prevail against," (Mat. 16:18) His Church. He never said "for a certain amount of time they won't," or "until all of the Apostles die," or "until Constantine comes into the picture." His promise still applies to this very day. If it only applied for a certain amount of time, then He would have mentioned it.

Quote
I refer you to Christ's Letters to the Churches. As the Church consists [by scriptural definition] of those who are indwelt of the Spirit, Paul was correct.

And those who united to the Apostles' teachings (2 Thess. 2:15). Plus, no one has the Holy Spirit except for those who belong to the Orthodox Church. It is only given after Chrismation.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 03:16:08 PM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,077


Nepsis or Sepsis™


« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2013, 04:05:39 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eunoia
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #20 on: April 16, 2013, 04:25:21 PM »


Can't Y also be a vowel in the english alphabet?
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Happy Lutheran
Servant of Christ
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Lutheran
Posts: 258



« Reply #21 on: April 16, 2013, 04:25:43 PM »

Hi Rachel! Welcome to our humble corner of the internet. There seems to be many people in this discussion, so I hesitate to add another voice.


lol, as much fun as it is to converse and debate (and learn) here on the protestant board it can be tough keeping up with everyones questions as you can become bombarded with objections/questions ect. I've learned on this site and others like it you just have to make your main points, let the counter arguments make theirs and let them stand before it turns into 5 pages of off topic and circular arguments and sometimes, into insults.

Logged

1 Corinthians 1:27 - But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #22 on: April 16, 2013, 06:07:27 PM »

Hi Rachel! Welcome to our humble corner of the internet. There seems to be many people in this discussion, so I hesitate to add another voice, but I do have some questions for you.

1.  If we are to rely on the Holy Spirit for guidance, why are there so many people will so many different opinions on what Scripture says?  Would you argue that you are right and to the extent that other people disagree with you, they are wrong?  Why doesn't the Holy Spirit lead people to the same conclusion?

hi! Many people believe they are indwelt of the Holy Spirit because they are taught that he indwelt them upon paedobaptism. There are many opinions on scripture because post-Enlightenment, the world is full of liberal theologians and it is Satan's business to spread confusion. A person is not right or wrong dependent upon whether he agrees with me but upon whether he agrees with scripture.

Quote
2.  If as Paul states, that the Church is the pillar of Truth, what Church can we go to in order to gain this Truth?  If the gates of hell can never prevail against the Church that is the pillar of Truth, does that mean that the correct Church is one that has been around since the very beginning and can show that it has always taught the same thing since the time of the Apostles?

if it has taught the writings of the Apostles, it will concur with scripture. Thus its basis of salvation will be scriptural.  

Quote
3.  If someone were to read all of the writings of the early Church and see that what they teach are consistently not in line with what we now interpret from our 21st century mindset reading of Scripture, should we be willing to exercise enough humility to accept that perhaps we are not interpreting things properly and maybe we should listen to the writings of those who lived very close to the time of Christ and the Apostles?

the 21st century mindset is relativistic and existential - which is a form of mysticism. The writings of the Apostles are contained in scripture - I don't see the difficulty. We should be humbly subject to the Spirit.

Quote
4.  How do we know that the books that are in the Bible are the right ones?  If the Holy Spirit spoke to the men at Nicea and told them which books to put in the Bible, why would we not trust that the Holy Spirit also guided them in other matters as well?

because it would lack spiritual discernment. We recognise the canon for its coherence and consistency and because of the Spirit's witness, not because of the fallible men involved.

Quote
I hope this is not too many questions as I don't want to overwhelm you, but I am curious as to your thoughts on these questions.
you are more than welcome.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #23 on: April 16, 2013, 06:11:20 PM »

Quote
but the issue IS, whether this is what the Bible teaches or not. What your statement plainly tells me is that you have no certainty of your own salvation but Paul says that the redeemed have ALREADY passed from death to life and have the seal of the Spirit upon them. Perhaps you should ask why you have no such assurance.

We are saved, that is true, but we can still fall. Ananias and Sapphira were both christians. We must always keep struggling.

we are saved but we sin - true. Nothing tells you that Ananias and Sapphira were lost.

True, but it should surely give us an indication. Christ said that many shall call him Lord and still be lost. There is always the chance that some will end up going against the Faith, Paul even mentions it. Salvation requires faith, true faith.
yes we know that there will be an apostate church - that is why churches are not to be trusted. There are many who have been told they are saved who are not and so do not have the seal of the Spirit ie the assurance which comes with salvation.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #24 on: April 16, 2013, 06:18:27 PM »

Quote
the 21st century mindset is relativistic and existential - which is a form of mysticism. The writings of the Apostles are contained in scripture - I don't see the difficulty. We should be humbly subject to the Spirit.

I'm sorry to take a quote from a conversation with another poster but this is exactly the problem. You don't see the difficulty because to you, the scriptures are clear. But there are literally millions of protestants who do the exact same thing. They all believe that what they teach is in agreement with scriptures and yet, there teachings differ from each other. They all believe they are being directed by the Holy Spirit but they are still moving in different directions. It is like a lot of people, trying to cross the sea in the middle of a storm. Some may, bu Gods grace, get to the other side, but, in the same way God gave Noah the ark, so has He given us an Ark of Salvation, that is, the Church.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #25 on: April 16, 2013, 06:22:58 PM »

Quote
but the issue IS, whether this is what the Bible teaches or not. What your statement plainly tells me is that you have no certainty of your own salvation but Paul says that the redeemed have ALREADY passed from death to life and have the seal of the Spirit upon them. Perhaps you should ask why you have no such assurance.

We are saved, that is true, but we can still fall. Ananias and Sapphira were both christians. We must always keep struggling.

we are saved but we sin - true. Nothing tells you that Ananias and Sapphira were lost.

True, but it should surely give us an indication. Christ said that many shall call him Lord and still be lost. There is always the chance that some will end up going against the Faith, Paul even mentions it. Salvation requires faith, true faith.
yes we know that there will be an apostate church - that is why churches are not to be trusted. There are many who have been told they are saved who are not and so do not have the seal of the Spirit ie the assurance which comes with salvation.

There will be apostates, yes, but there will also be the true Church. Christ established the priesthood, the line of bishops, who operate under the authority of apostolic succesion, in the Church. All our bishops can be traced back to the apostles, in a direct lineage. By this, the teachings of the Church, and thus, the teachings of the Apostles, are being upheld, so that the words of Christ may come true, "That the gates of hell shall not prevail against it".
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #26 on: April 16, 2013, 06:25:53 PM »

Quote
Well he obviously wants us to understand something of himself. Why do you think he says, "come let us reason together...." if this is an impossibility and he is completely beyond human reason. Why reveal himself to us at all if we cannot understand?

We can understand what God reveals to us, by the Grace of the Holy Spirit, but not the fullness, the essence of God.

we don't understand God exhaustively because he is infinite.

Quote
Do you believe that the bible is intended to communicate true, reasonable propositions?
 

Quote
Quote
.The Bible presupposes the faith of the reader. It is a faith document—not science, philosophy, history, archaeology, literature, ideology, or biography. Because of its origins and usage in the community of faith, it does not attempt to establish its own authenticity or to prove its basic assumptions. It was not intended as a logical proof for the existence of God or for the reality of that to which it attests
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Holy_Scripture

the first sentence is untrue. If the Bible presupposed the faith of the reader IN GOD, there would be no Gospel.   
The Gospel is in the Bible.

yes and the Church's commission is to preach it - so scripture does not presuppose faith, it encourages mankind to return to God.

Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Well Christ is responsible for our salvation through his death and resurrection. All who accept his gift of salvation are the 'bride of Christ.'
Many early heretics also accepted the Gift of Salvation, but that didn't stop the Church from excommunicate them.

which suggests that one should not trust the church!
No, it means the opposite. Christ promised that the gates of Hell should never prevail against the Church, therefore, the visible Church must exist today, and does so.

that begs the question whether the church was RIGHT to excommunicate them - if it wasn't, it is meaningless. The visible Church does indeed exist today.

Quote
Quote
As to the original topic, the Orthodox Church doesn't accept the teachings about the rapture, as presented by some modern protestant denominations.

Quote
on its behalf, please demonstrate this to be Biblical.

The belief that many protestants today hold, is that the righteous will be raptured before the coming of Antichrist. There is nothing in scripture that suggest this.

yes there is - see above.

 
Quote
Quote
The Holy scriptures clearly states, that christians will have to go through tribulations before the Second Coming of Christ.
Quote

this is true. Why does this show the rapture to be unBiblical?

It shows that the above mentioned is false.

no it doesn't. Scripture tells us that many will be saved during the Tribulation ie not all who are saved are members of the Church.
 
Quote
I think we actually agree on most points concerning this, but the Church has never used the term to describe the Second Coming of Christ and therefore, we don't use it.
neither do I, the Rapture is not the Second Advent.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #27 on: April 16, 2013, 06:36:45 PM »

Quote
but the issue IS, whether this is what the Bible teaches or not. What your statement plainly tells me is that you have no certainty of your own salvation but Paul says that the redeemed have ALREADY passed from death to life and have the seal of the Spirit upon them. Perhaps you should ask why you have no such assurance.

We are saved, that is true, but we can still fall. Ananias and Sapphira were both christians. We must always keep struggling.

we are saved but we sin - true. Nothing tells you that Ananias and Sapphira were lost.

True, but it should surely give us an indication. Christ said that many shall call him Lord and still be lost. There is always the chance that some will end up going against the Faith, Paul even mentions it. Salvation requires faith, true faith.
yes we know that there will be an apostate church - that is why churches are not to be trusted. There are many who have been told they are saved who are not and so do not have the seal of the Spirit ie the assurance which comes with salvation.

There will be apostates, yes, but there will also be the true Church.

this is true.
 
Quote
Christ established the priesthood, the line of bishops, who operate under the authority of apostolic succesion, in the Church.

we have one priest, who  is Christ. Scripture tells us that all the redeemed are priests unto God.

Quote
All our bishops can be traced back to the apostles, in a direct lineage.

even if this could be shown to be true, why would it be significant? The truth, "as once delivered" is the truth, what more is needed?

Quote
By this, the teachings of the Church, and thus, the teachings of the Apostles, are being upheld, so that the words of Christ may come true, "That the gates of hell shall not prevail against it".
scripture says, "I will watch over my word to perform it" This is how the teachings of the Apostles are upheld, not by fallible  men.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #28 on: April 16, 2013, 06:44:12 PM »

Quote
we have one priest, who  is Christ. Scripture tells us that all the redeemed are priests unto God.

You do know what presbyter mean, right? The Apostles appointed elders to lead the communities. This is the priesthood.

Quote
even if this could be shown to be true, why would it be significant? The truth, "as once delivered" is the truth, what more is needed?
Because it is authority ahnded over. It ensures that the bishops uphold the teachings of God. What is needed is someone to ensure that heresies don't corrupt the faithful.

Quote
cripture says, "I will watch over my word to perform it" This is how the teachings of the Apostles are upheld, not by fallible  men.

Did not the Apostles lead the Church? It is fallible men, yes, but it is fallible men, ordained by God.

 
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #29 on: April 16, 2013, 06:46:39 PM »

Quote
the 21st century mindset is relativistic and existential - which is a form of mysticism. The writings of the Apostles are contained in scripture - I don't see the difficulty. We should be humbly subject to the Spirit.

I'm sorry to take a quote from a conversation with another poster but this is exactly the problem. You don't see the difficulty because to you, the scriptures are clear.

if the Spirit is doing the teaching, why would you expect otherwise?
Quote
But there are literally millions of protestants who do the exact same thing. They all believe that what they teach is in agreement with scriptures and yet, there teachings differ from each other. They all believe they are being directed by the Holy Spirit but they are still moving in different directions.

this is a common assertion but specifics are rarely cited and on balance it is somewhat overstated. God does not treat his children as ciphers. People do not all receive the same revelation at the same time, neither is the process of sanctification the same for everyone. An exegesis either withstands rational analysis or it doesn't.
 
Quote
It is like a lot of people, trying to cross the sea in the middle of a storm. Some may, bu Gods grace, get to the other side, but, in the same way God gave Noah the ark, so has He given us an Ark of Salvation, that is, the Church.
Christ is my ark. I know which I would rather trust.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #30 on: April 16, 2013, 06:53:20 PM »

Quote
this is a common assertion but specifics are rarely cited and on balance it is somewhat overstated. God does not treat his children as ciphers. People do not all receive the same revelation at the same time, neither is the process of sanctification the same for everyone. An exegesis either withstands rational analysis or it doesn't.
 

You want specifics? Some protestants believe in adult baptism and some in infant baptism. Some believe in saints and some reject them. The arians believed that Christ was created. Some protestants even deny the Trinity. This is an issue that can hardly be overstated. One is truth, the other is heresy.

Quote
Christ is my ark. I know which I would rather trust.
Posted on: Today at 05:44:12 PM Posted by: Ansgar

The Church is the body of Christ, a fact which Paul states on numerous occasions. You cannot seperate the Church from Christ.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 06:55:02 PM by Ansgar » Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #31 on: April 16, 2013, 07:00:06 PM »

Quote
we have one priest, who  is Christ. Scripture tells us that all the redeemed are priests unto God.

You do know what presbyter mean, right? The Apostles appointed elders to lead the communities. This is the priesthood.
if your priest is just a leader, 'priest' is a misnomer

Quote
Quote
even if this could be shown to be true, why would it be significant? The truth, "as once delivered" is the truth, what more is needed?
Because it is authority ahnded over. It ensures that the bishops uphold the teachings of God. What is needed is someone to ensure that heresies don't corrupt the faithful.

I have no objection to bishops. The Bereans teach us that all are responsible for this.

Quote
Quote
Scripture says, "I will watch over my word to perform it" This is how the teachings of the Apostles are upheld, not by fallible  men.

Did not the Apostles lead the Church? It is fallible men, yes, but it is fallible men, ordained by God.
We are getting into the issue of Church governance . This is ok but off topic. The priest is an intermediary between God and Man. We have one who is Christ.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,077


Nepsis or Sepsis™


« Reply #32 on: April 16, 2013, 07:09:37 PM »

Guys, if you want to get anywhere, stick to one, specific topic, and argue to your audience.

Okay?

Argue to your audience.

Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
rachel
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Christian
Posts: 310



« Reply #33 on: April 16, 2013, 07:10:38 PM »

Quote
this is a common assertion but specifics are rarely cited and on balance it is somewhat overstated. God does not treat his children as ciphers. People do not all receive the same revelation at the same time, neither is the process of sanctification the same for everyone. An exegesis either withstands rational analysis or it doesn't.
 

You want specifics? Some protestants believe in adult baptism and some in infant baptism. Some believe in saints and some reject them. The arians believed that Christ was created. Some protestants even deny the Trinity. This is an issue that can hardly be overstated. One is truth, the other is heresy.

the Bible is clear on all these issues. Unanimity of belief is not a guarantee that a church is part of the Universal Church, it just  indicates unanimity of belief and whether this is nominal or actual is a moot point . It may be simply a sign that members believe what they're told unquestioningly or even that they don't really care!

Quote
Quote
Christ is my ark. I know which I would rather trust.
Posted on: Today at 05:44:12 PM Posted by: Ansgar

The Church is the body of Christ, a fact which Paul states on numerous occasions. You cannot seperate the Church from Christ.
of course you can't, he indwells the redeemed and they make up the Church.
Logged

Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria,   Sola Scriptura
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2013, 07:14:06 PM »

Quote
if your priest is just a leader, 'priest' is a misnomer

A priest, am man who has been ordained to perform the holy acts, to lead the liturgy, to lead his flock on the right path.

Quote
I have no objection to bishops. The Bereans teach us that all are responsible for this.

The bishops were appointed to maintain order, unity. It is perfectly clear and it have always been that way.

Quote
We are getting into the issue of Church governance . This is ok but off topic. The priest is an intermediary between God and Man. We have one who is Christ.

The early Church had a priesthood, so we have a priesthood. Saint Ignatius said: Where the bishop is, there is the Church. Christ is the High Priest, the head of the Church.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #35 on: April 16, 2013, 07:22:29 PM »

Quote
the Bible is clear on all these issues. Unanimity of belief is not a guarantee that a church is part of the Universal Church, it just  indicates unanimity of belief and whether this is nominal or actual is a moot point . It may be simply a sign that members believe what they're told unquestioningly or even that they don't really care!

It may be clear, but that doesn't help people from misinterpreting the scriptures. We believe our faith is historical, that it is identical to the apostolic faith.

Quote
of course you can't, he indwells the redeemed and they make up the Church.

Then why do you seperate them by saying that one should not trust churches?
There is a reason why the Church hold councils. It is to establish unity in faith. To show that we are united in faith and in scructure. To show that we aren't just a bunch of people who happens to have reached the same theological conclusions.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #36 on: April 16, 2013, 07:26:34 PM »

Quote
well Paul did and urged it where it was contrary to the GOSPEL

The Gospel and the teachings of the Church is the same thing.

Quote
[well I've pointed out that scripture states that the Antichrist cannot rise until the Church is removed and that the Antichrist presides over the Tribulation./quote]

First, I haven't seen you do that, and secondly, that idea is heretical. I repeat, the gates of Hell shall NOT prevail against the Church, not now, not ever.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
orthonorm
Moderated
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,670



« Reply #37 on: April 16, 2013, 10:22:13 PM »

Please keep these gems coming, in the name of HaShem!
You have literally said: "in the name of TheName."

I like to believe one of two things:

1.) Alveus knows this and is making a joke.

2.) Alveus doesn't know he knows this cause he has developed a perfected Christian phunoma.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Moderated
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,670



« Reply #38 on: April 16, 2013, 10:27:12 PM »


And w as well.

Ansgar, some of us learned the complete mnemonic for this in grade school:

A, E, I, O, and U.
Sometimes Y and W.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 10:29:36 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #39 on: April 16, 2013, 10:30:30 PM »

***BUMP***



I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

thank you Gebre!

Quote
1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

there is one baptism, which is not for the remission of sins.

Quote
2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?

the Holy Spirit.


Quote


Thank you for answering my questions. But I'm not sure I understand your response to my first question. Do you accept the Nicene Creed in its fullness or do you only accept parts of it (or none of it?)

I only take issue with the unbiblical idea of salvific baptism.

Quote
As for your answer to the second question, therein is the fundamental point of departure between your personal interpretation of Christianity and the Orthodox Christian Faith.

I would say that, if we are to speak of 'personal interpretation' we should ensure that the issue is actually open to interpretation. Also, since I am indwelt of the Spirit, my 'interpretation' is not imply personal. For the same reason, the Bereans were confident to put their faith in scripture.

 
Quote
If you accept the inerrancy of the Bible, then you must accept that the Bible nowhere states that scripture alone or the Holy Spirit alone (or a combination of the two) is the foundation of truth.

yes it does Gebre. Jesus assures me that his Spirit will lead me into all truth. This is not hypothetical - it may be experienced. What do you mean by, "the foundation of truth"? Jesus says HE is the infinite absolute, the personification of truth. He indwells me. What could be more foundational?

Quote
In fact, I Timothy 3:15 clearly states that "the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth."

Scripture defines a Christian as someone who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The Church is comprised of such people. It is the Holy Spirit within the obedient church which makes it the pillar and foundation of truth. An institution is not the pillar and foundation of truth merely because we attach a label bearing the word 'church' to it. Scripture itself teaches us this.

Quote
Scripture also clearly states that "no scripture is a matter of individual interpretation." [II Peter 1:20]

this is true; were I alone in holding the view I do, then I would clearly have a problem. However truth is not guaranteed by statistics. The test is always the rationality of a doctrine when tested against scripture. Thus for example, if someone proclaims the rapture as occurring at the second advent, the view makes nonsense of other scriptures

Quote
So, with respect (and I don't mean to sound rude or condescending), unless you accept the proper foundational authority of Christian belief, then there is no point in discussing doctrine or theology with you.

Which 'Church' shall we use as 'foundational' for the purposes of our discussion? If your thesis is correct and the Orthodox Church is the receptacle of all truth, you will have no difficulty in undermining my position on grounds of rationality alone. This will be fine by me but to establish that the Orthodox Church is part of the Church Universal, we will need to establish that its basis of salvation accords with the writings of the Apostles.

Quote
It will inevitably turn into a proof texting contest, and that could go on ad infinitum with nothing resolved. We can never agree if we are starting from two fundamentally different foundations.


but we both start from the foundation that the Word of God is inerrant because that is what it claims to be. You don't believe that God  lies and neither do I, so we both expect exegesis to be rational,  coherent and consistent.

Quote
So, you are faced with the same crucial choice that all of us who are converts from Protestantism were once faced with: Will you continue to lean upon your own fallible interpretations of holy scripture,

but this is a wilful misrepresentation of my position. You speak as though you consider the leading of the Spirit to be theoretical - is that what you think?

Quote
or will you trust the Church through which the scriptures came to us?

but the scriptures have come to me through the Apostles, to whose writings I adhere.

Quote
Will you cling to your own finite understanding of the Bible while claiming that the Holy Spirit is guiding you, or will you truly trust in the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who works in and through the Church that Our Lord instituted for our spiritual guidance, strength, and protection?

the latter. I will trust the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who indwells me.

Quote
I hope that you will consider this choice carefully, soberly, and prayerfully.

I have, I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I've committed to him.

Quote
The peace of Our Lord be with you.
and with you


As others have pointed out already, anyone can claim that their interpretation of scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit. But the Protestant landscape is littered with thousands of competing doctrines, all of which argue their ostensible validity from the same premise that you do. But again I point out to you that the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth, not Rachel's interpretation of the Bible. And the Church is neither a manmade physical institution nor an amorphous universal intangible collection of common consciousness. The Church is the Body and Bride of Christ, the repository and dispenser of the true Faith, the protector of sound doctrine, and the institution wherein we receive healing and strength through participation in her sacramental life. The Church is physical, tangible, universal, historical, apostolic, and mystical. The Church is the only institution that is safeguarded with the divine promise that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." [St. Matthew 16:18] The true Church is evidenced by its adherence to "that faith which was once for all delivered unto the Saints." [Jude 3] So, wherever novel doctrines are preached, books of scripture are deleted, theological innovations are espoused, and the apostolic faith is reinterpreted, you can be sure that such things are not of the Church.

I shall leave it at that, for others have answered your questions very thoroughly already. It is my prayer that you choose the path of the apostolic Faith rather than the path of your own understanding. If you are truly led by the Holy Spirit, then I am confident that He will lead you to His true Church.

Peace to you.


Selam
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 10:34:32 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
orthonorm
Moderated
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,670



« Reply #40 on: April 16, 2013, 10:32:04 PM »

***BUMP***



I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

thank you Gebre!

Quote
1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

there is one baptism, which is not for the remission of sins.

Quote
2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?

the Holy Spirit.


Quote


Thank you for answering my questions. But I'm not sure I understand your response to my first question. Do you accept the Nicene Creed in its fullness or do you only accept parts of it (or none of it?)

I only take issue with the unbiblical idea of salvific baptism.

Quote
As for your answer to the second question, therein is the fundamental point of departure between your personal interpretation of Christianity and the Orthodox Christian Faith.

I would say that, if we are to speak of 'personal interpretation' we should ensure that the issue is actually open to interpretation. Also, since I am indwelt of the Spirit, my 'interpretation' is not imply personal. For the same reason, the Bereans were confident to put their faith in scripture.

 
Quote
If you accept the inerrancy of the Bible, then you must accept that the Bible nowhere states that scripture alone or the Holy Spirit alone (or a combination of the two) is the foundation of truth.

yes it does Gebre. Jesus assures me that his Spirit will lead me into all truth. This is not hypothetical - it may be experienced. What do you mean by, "the foundation of truth"? Jesus says HE is the infinite absolute, the personification of truth. He indwells me. What could be more foundational?

Quote
In fact, I Timothy 3:15 clearly states that "the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth."

Scripture defines a Christian as someone who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The Church is comprised of such people. It is the Holy Spirit within the obedient church which makes it the pillar and foundation of truth. An institution is not the pillar and foundation of truth merely because we attach a label bearing the word 'church' to it. Scripture itself teaches us this.

Quote
Scripture also clearly states that "no scripture is a matter of individual interpretation." [II Peter 1:20]

this is true; were I alone in holding the view I do, then I would clearly have a problem. However truth is not guaranteed by statistics. The test is always the rationality of a doctrine when tested against scripture. Thus for example, if someone proclaims the rapture as occurring at the second advent, the view makes nonsense of other scriptures

Quote
So, with respect (and I don't mean to sound rude or condescending), unless you accept the proper foundational authority of Christian belief, then there is no point in discussing doctrine or theology with you.

Which 'Church' shall we use as 'foundational' for the purposes of our discussion? If your thesis is correct and the Orthodox Church is the receptacle of all truth, you will have no difficulty in undermining my position on grounds of rationality alone. This will be fine by me but to establish that the Orthodox Church is part of the Church Universal, we will need to establish that its basis of salvation accords with the writings of the Apostles.

Quote
It will inevitably turn into a proof texting contest, and that could go on ad infinitum with nothing resolved. We can never agree if we are starting from two fundamentally different foundations.


but we both start from the foundation that the Word of God is inerrant because that is what it claims to be. You don't believe that God  lies and neither do I, so we both expect exegesis to be rational,  coherent and consistent.

Quote
So, you are faced with the same crucial choice that all of us who are converts from Protestantism were once faced with: Will you continue to lean upon your own fallible interpretations of holy scripture,

but this is a wilful misrepresentation of my position. You speak as though you consider the leading of the Spirit to be theoretical - is that what you think?

Quote
or will you trust the Church through which the scriptures came to us?

but the scriptures have come to me through the Apostles, to whose writings I adhere.

Quote
Will you cling to your own finite understanding of the Bible while claiming that the Holy Spirit is guiding you, or will you truly trust in the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who works in and through the Church that Our Lord instituted for our spiritual guidance, strength, and protection?

the latter. I will trust the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who indwells me.

Quote
I hope that you will consider this choice carefully, soberly, and prayerfully.

I have, I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I've committed to him.

Quote
The peace of Our Lord be with you.
and with you


Selam



As others have pointed out already, anyone can claim that their interpretation of scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit. But the Protestant landscape is littered with thousands of competing doctrines, all of which argue their ostensible validity from the same premise that you do. But again I point out to you that the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth, not Rachel's interpretation of the Bible. And the Church is neither a manmade physical institution nor an amorphous universal intangible collection of common consciousness. The Church is the Body and Bride of Christ, the repository and dispenser of the true Faith, the protector of sound doctrine, and the institution wherein we receive healing and strength through participation in her sacramental life. The Church is physical, tangible, universal, historical, apostolic, and mystical. The Church is the only institution that is safeguarded with the divine promise that "the gates of hell shall prevail it." [St. Matthew 16:18] The true Church is evidenced by its adherence to "that faith which was once for all delivered unto the Saints." [Jude 3] So, wherever novel doctrines are preached, books of scripture are deleted, theological innovations are espoused, and the apostolic faith is reinterpreted, you can be sure that such things are not of the Church.

I shall leave it at that, for others have answered your questions very thoroughly already. It is my prayer that you choose the path of the apostolic Faith rather than the path of your own understanding. If you are truly led by the Holy Spirit, then I am confident that He will lead you to His true Church.

Peace to you.


Selam

I like this back and forth. Very soothing.

EDIT: Oh, I thought you are just quoting the same thing over and over again. A quote tag is just messed up.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 10:36:30 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,998


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #41 on: April 17, 2013, 01:03:47 AM »

***BUMP***



I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

thank you Gebre!

Quote
1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

there is one baptism, which is not for the remission of sins.

Quote
2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?

the Holy Spirit.


Quote


Thank you for answering my questions. But I'm not sure I understand your response to my first question. Do you accept the Nicene Creed in its fullness or do you only accept parts of it (or none of it?)

I only take issue with the unbiblical idea of salvific baptism.

Quote
As for your answer to the second question, therein is the fundamental point of departure between your personal interpretation of Christianity and the Orthodox Christian Faith.

I would say that, if we are to speak of 'personal interpretation' we should ensure that the issue is actually open to interpretation. Also, since I am indwelt of the Spirit, my 'interpretation' is not imply personal. For the same reason, the Bereans were confident to put their faith in scripture.

 
Quote
If you accept the inerrancy of the Bible, then you must accept that the Bible nowhere states that scripture alone or the Holy Spirit alone (or a combination of the two) is the foundation of truth.

yes it does Gebre. Jesus assures me that his Spirit will lead me into all truth. This is not hypothetical - it may be experienced. What do you mean by, "the foundation of truth"? Jesus says HE is the infinite absolute, the personification of truth. He indwells me. What could be more foundational?

Quote
In fact, I Timothy 3:15 clearly states that "the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth."

Scripture defines a Christian as someone who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The Church is comprised of such people. It is the Holy Spirit within the obedient church which makes it the pillar and foundation of truth. An institution is not the pillar and foundation of truth merely because we attach a label bearing the word 'church' to it. Scripture itself teaches us this.

Quote
Scripture also clearly states that "no scripture is a matter of individual interpretation." [II Peter 1:20]

this is true; were I alone in holding the view I do, then I would clearly have a problem. However truth is not guaranteed by statistics. The test is always the rationality of a doctrine when tested against scripture. Thus for example, if someone proclaims the rapture as occurring at the second advent, the view makes nonsense of other scriptures

Quote
So, with respect (and I don't mean to sound rude or condescending), unless you accept the proper foundational authority of Christian belief, then there is no point in discussing doctrine or theology with you.

Which 'Church' shall we use as 'foundational' for the purposes of our discussion? If your thesis is correct and the Orthodox Church is the receptacle of all truth, you will have no difficulty in undermining my position on grounds of rationality alone. This will be fine by me but to establish that the Orthodox Church is part of the Church Universal, we will need to establish that its basis of salvation accords with the writings of the Apostles.

Quote
It will inevitably turn into a proof texting contest, and that could go on ad infinitum with nothing resolved. We can never agree if we are starting from two fundamentally different foundations.


but we both start from the foundation that the Word of God is inerrant because that is what it claims to be. You don't believe that God  lies and neither do I, so we both expect exegesis to be rational,  coherent and consistent.

Quote
So, you are faced with the same crucial choice that all of us who are converts from Protestantism were once faced with: Will you continue to lean upon your own fallible interpretations of holy scripture,

but this is a wilful misrepresentation of my position. You speak as though you consider the leading of the Spirit to be theoretical - is that what you think?

Quote
or will you trust the Church through which the scriptures came to us?

but the scriptures have come to me through the Apostles, to whose writings I adhere.

Quote
Will you cling to your own finite understanding of the Bible while claiming that the Holy Spirit is guiding you, or will you truly trust in the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who works in and through the Church that Our Lord instituted for our spiritual guidance, strength, and protection?

the latter. I will trust the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who indwells me.

Quote
I hope that you will consider this choice carefully, soberly, and prayerfully.

I have, I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I've committed to him.

Quote
The peace of Our Lord be with you.
and with you


Selam



As others have pointed out already, anyone can claim that their interpretation of scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit. But the Protestant landscape is littered with thousands of competing doctrines, all of which argue their ostensible validity from the same premise that you do. But again I point out to you that the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth, not Rachel's interpretation of the Bible. And the Church is neither a manmade physical institution nor an amorphous universal intangible collection of common consciousness. The Church is the Body and Bride of Christ, the repository and dispenser of the true Faith, the protector of sound doctrine, and the institution wherein we receive healing and strength through participation in her sacramental life. The Church is physical, tangible, universal, historical, apostolic, and mystical. The Church is the only institution that is safeguarded with the divine promise that "the gates of hell shall prevail it." [St. Matthew 16:18] The true Church is evidenced by its adherence to "that faith which was once for all delivered unto the Saints." [Jude 3] So, wherever novel doctrines are preached, books of scripture are deleted, theological innovations are espoused, and the apostolic faith is reinterpreted, you can be sure that such things are not of the Church.

I shall leave it at that, for others have answered your questions very thoroughly already. It is my prayer that you choose the path of the apostolic Faith rather than the path of your own understanding. If you are truly led by the Holy Spirit, then I am confident that He will lead you to His true Church.

Peace to you.


Selam

I like this back and forth. Very soothing.

EDIT: Oh, I thought you are just quoting the same thing over and over again. A quote tag is just messed up.

Will someone take the liberty of correcting this quote tag already? It's blinds my eyes.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 3,009


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #42 on: April 17, 2013, 02:00:27 AM »


And w as well.

Ansgar, some of us learned the complete mnemonic for this in grade school:

A, E, I, O, and U.
Sometimes Y and W.

Really? How can W be a vowel?
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,641


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #43 on: April 17, 2013, 02:08:35 AM »


And w as well.

Ansgar, some of us learned the complete mnemonic for this in grade school:

A, E, I, O, and U.
Sometimes Y and W.

Really? How can W be a vowel?

When it is part of a vowel combination like ew, aw, and ow.
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,448


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #44 on: April 17, 2013, 02:48:12 AM »

***BUMP***



I attended a Dispensational Bible college, so I'm pretty familiar with the subject.

Dear Rachel,

Welcome to the forum! A couple of questions for you:

thank you Gebre!

Quote
1. Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

there is one baptism, which is not for the remission of sins.

Quote
2. What do you rely upon as the authoritative foundation for spiritual understanding and truth?

the Holy Spirit.


Quote


Thank you for answering my questions. But I'm not sure I understand your response to my first question. Do you accept the Nicene Creed in its fullness or do you only accept parts of it (or none of it?)

I only take issue with the unbiblical idea of salvific baptism.

Quote
As for your answer to the second question, therein is the fundamental point of departure between your personal interpretation of Christianity and the Orthodox Christian Faith.

I would say that, if we are to speak of 'personal interpretation' we should ensure that the issue is actually open to interpretation. Also, since I am indwelt of the Spirit, my 'interpretation' is not imply personal. For the same reason, the Bereans were confident to put their faith in scripture.

 
Quote
If you accept the inerrancy of the Bible, then you must accept that the Bible nowhere states that scripture alone or the Holy Spirit alone (or a combination of the two) is the foundation of truth.

yes it does Gebre. Jesus assures me that his Spirit will lead me into all truth. This is not hypothetical - it may be experienced. What do you mean by, "the foundation of truth"? Jesus says HE is the infinite absolute, the personification of truth. He indwells me. What could be more foundational?

Quote
In fact, I Timothy 3:15 clearly states that "the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth."

Scripture defines a Christian as someone who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The Church is comprised of such people. It is the Holy Spirit within the obedient church which makes it the pillar and foundation of truth. An institution is not the pillar and foundation of truth merely because we attach a label bearing the word 'church' to it. Scripture itself teaches us this.

Quote
Scripture also clearly states that "no scripture is a matter of individual interpretation." [II Peter 1:20]

this is true; were I alone in holding the view I do, then I would clearly have a problem. However truth is not guaranteed by statistics. The test is always the rationality of a doctrine when tested against scripture. Thus for example, if someone proclaims the rapture as occurring at the second advent, the view makes nonsense of other scriptures

Quote
So, with respect (and I don't mean to sound rude or condescending), unless you accept the proper foundational authority of Christian belief, then there is no point in discussing doctrine or theology with you.

Which 'Church' shall we use as 'foundational' for the purposes of our discussion? If your thesis is correct and the Orthodox Church is the receptacle of all truth, you will have no difficulty in undermining my position on grounds of rationality alone. This will be fine by me but to establish that the Orthodox Church is part of the Church Universal, we will need to establish that its basis of salvation accords with the writings of the Apostles.

Quote
It will inevitably turn into a proof texting contest, and that could go on ad infinitum with nothing resolved. We can never agree if we are starting from two fundamentally different foundations.


but we both start from the foundation that the Word of God is inerrant because that is what it claims to be. You don't believe that God  lies and neither do I, so we both expect exegesis to be rational,  coherent and consistent.

Quote
So, you are faced with the same crucial choice that all of us who are converts from Protestantism were once faced with: Will you continue to lean upon your own fallible interpretations of holy scripture,

but this is a wilful misrepresentation of my position. You speak as though you consider the leading of the Spirit to be theoretical - is that what you think?

Quote
or will you trust the Church through which the scriptures came to us?

but the scriptures have come to me through the Apostles, to whose writings I adhere.

Quote
Will you cling to your own finite understanding of the Bible while claiming that the Holy Spirit is guiding you, or will you truly trust in the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who works in and through the Church that Our Lord instituted for our spiritual guidance, strength, and protection?

the latter. I will trust the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit who indwells me.

Quote
I hope that you will consider this choice carefully, soberly, and prayerfully.

I have, I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I've committed to him.

Quote
The peace of Our Lord be with you.
and with you


Selam



As others have pointed out already, anyone can claim that their interpretation of scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit. But the Protestant landscape is littered with thousands of competing doctrines, all of which argue their ostensible validity from the same premise that you do. But again I point out to you that the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth, not Rachel's interpretation of the Bible. And the Church is neither a manmade physical institution nor an amorphous universal intangible collection of common consciousness. The Church is the Body and Bride of Christ, the repository and dispenser of the true Faith, the protector of sound doctrine, and the institution wherein we receive healing and strength through participation in her sacramental life. The Church is physical, tangible, universal, historical, apostolic, and mystical. The Church is the only institution that is safeguarded with the divine promise that "the gates of hell shall prevail it." [St. Matthew 16:18] The true Church is evidenced by its adherence to "that faith which was once for all delivered unto the Saints." [Jude 3] So, wherever novel doctrines are preached, books of scripture are deleted, theological innovations are espoused, and the apostolic faith is reinterpreted, you can be sure that such things are not of the Church.

I shall leave it at that, for others have answered your questions very thoroughly already. It is my prayer that you choose the path of the apostolic Faith rather than the path of your own understanding. If you are truly led by the Holy Spirit, then I am confident that He will lead you to His true Church.

Peace to you.


Selam

I like this back and forth. Very soothing.

EDIT: Oh, I thought you are just quoting the same thing over and over again. A quote tag is just messed up.

Will someone take the liberty of correcting this quote tag already? It's blinds my eyes.

Isn't there a rule here that one is to shorten the number of responses to as few as possible by citing only those which are relevant?
If so, then the elephant above would not need to be reposted ad nauseum.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 »   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 0.251 seconds with 72 queries.