Go Back   Christian Guitar Forum > Deeper Issues > Theology
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 05-06-2016, 07:20 AM   #16
Registered User
 

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 821
So this is showing that there are a lot of messed up beliefs. This is the problem with adding to the word IMO. It opens up avenues for false teaching. If there is no paper trail it can't be verified and as is seen by the multitude of false doctrine cannot be trusted. It is a slippery slope. I accept some things must be taken on faith, but if they don't line up with the word, what good is the word? This isn't an antagonistic post, just a questioning post.

jwbrownlula is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Unread 05-06-2016, 08:27 AM   #17
Obnoxodox
 
IsaactheSyrian's Avatar
 

Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,859
paid
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwbrownlula View Post
So this is showing that there are a lot of messed up beliefs. This is the problem with adding to the word IMO. It opens up avenues for false teaching. If there is no paper trail it can't be verified and as is seen by the multitude of false doctrine cannot be trusted. It is a slippery slope. I accept some things must be taken on faith, but if they don't line up with the word, what good is the word? This isn't an antagonistic post, just a questioning post.
"The Word" is a person, not a book, so it's impossible to add to the Word because the Word is Him in whom the fulness of divinity was pleased to dwell (Colossians 1:19). Again I would point out that your statement presumes a certain interpretation of Sola Scriptura, and Sola Scriptura is simply not taught in Scripture, nor in church history prior to the 1500's. Indeed, Sola Scriptura has been the mother of all manner of heresies - anti-Trinitarianism (such as Oneness Pentecostalism) and neo-Arianism (Jehovah's Witnesses) just to name two of the most serious ones, that without the authority of the visible Church (and no, thousands of hodgepodge Protestant denominations does not a 'visible Church' make - a visible church must be exactly that - visibly united around a common Eucharistic chalice teaching common and identical doctrine) to clearly and univocally condemn these things as heresy, heresies like this have proliferated like wildfire.

Once you realize that the division between Scripture and tradition is artificial (that graphic should have a thinner border around Scripture), and that even the list of books which are in Scripture is itself a part of tradition, it becomes easier to see how Scripture itself is part of the Church's Tradition.
Attached Thumbnails
tradition.png  
__________________
I believe, O Lord, and I confess, that You are truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief...
~ Ryan Isaac




Last edited by IsaactheSyrian; 05-06-2016 at 08:54 AM.
IsaactheSyrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 09:10 AM   #18
Registered User
 

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 821
One could argue that church history has birthed an equal number of heresies. I would argue this one church does not exist anywhere I have seen if we confine it to a denomination. There is no unity even among the Orthodox that I can see. Too many opinions and not enough truth. I believe the church to be built of true believers regardless of name. I believe it will be built of protestants catholics orthodox and some who have never heard those names. Revelation 22:18 talks of adding to the book, I refer to the book as the word, but agree with Jesus being the word that was with God. I am struggling with the history of the bible as I see your point. Do you believe the apocrypha should be included?
jwbrownlula is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 09:45 AM   #19
Obnoxodox
 
IsaactheSyrian's Avatar
 

Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,859
paid
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwbrownlula View Post
One could argue that church history has birthed an equal number of heresies.
Name one, and on what basis you consider it heresy.
Quote:
There is no unity even among the Orthodox that I can see.
On what do you base this argument? How are you defining unity and how is the Orthodox Church in disunity?

Please note: different national jurisdictions do not disunity make.

Quote:
Do you believe the apocrypha should be included?
Yes. The so-called 'apocrypha' (which aren't actually apocryphal at all) were part of the Septuagint, which was the Greek translation of the Old Testament in use at the time of Jesus.
__________________
I believe, O Lord, and I confess, that You are truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief...
~ Ryan Isaac




Last edited by IsaactheSyrian; 05-06-2016 at 10:01 AM.
IsaactheSyrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:18 AM   #20
Registered User
 

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 821
The whole reason the Orthodox church split from the Catholic Church was brought upon by difference of opinion on tradition. I see no shortage of heresies such as denial of the immaculate conception, or even sects arguing that Mary was born of immaculate conception. Church history is easily twisted. As far back as Paul we see him write letters trying to iron out confusion.
jwbrownlula is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:24 AM   #21
Registered User
 

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 821
Forgive me if I'm mistakenot about some things. I'm here to learn, and my sources are limited. "If it's on the internet it must be true right?" I see many arguments among Orthodox about the use of a calendar? There is not this church wide unity.
jwbrownlula is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:32 AM   #22
Obnoxodox
 
IsaactheSyrian's Avatar
 

Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,859
paid
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwbrownlula View Post
The whole reason the Orthodox church split from the Catholic Church was brought upon by difference of opinion on tradition. I see no shortage of heresies such as denial of the immaculate conception, or even sects arguing that Mary was born of immaculate conception. Church history is easily twisted. As far back as Paul we see him write letters trying to iron out confusion.
The Orthodox church doesn't teach the Immaculate Conception, and never has. The Immaculate Conception is Rome's problem.

Though, it should be noted that the reason we have a problem with the IC is because we don't understand original sin as Western Christianity does, and in order for IC to make any sense you have to understand original sin as Western Christianity does (to wit: as inherited guilt). That's a whole other bag of cats, though.
Quote:
Forgive me if I'm mistakenot about some things. I'm here to learn, and my sources are limited. "If it's on the internet it must be true right?" I see many arguments among Orthodox about the use of a calendar? There is not this church wide unity.
You're referring to the fact that some Orthodox jurisdictions are fully on the Julian calendar, others use the Julian calendar only for the date of Pascha and everything that relies on the date of Pascha, while one church (specifically, the Orthodox Church of Finland) uses the Gregorian Calendar for everything? Is this what you're getting at? Just to be clear.

(Just as an aside, my own jurisdiction, the OCA, falls into the second category - Julian calendar for calculating Lent, Pascha and Pentecost, Gregorian for everything else (i.e. Christmas, mostly).
__________________
I believe, O Lord, and I confess, that You are truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief...
~ Ryan Isaac



IsaactheSyrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:37 AM   #23
Registered User
 

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 821
I am researching as quickly as possible to defend my statements. There is so much junk out there that I know the truth lies in the middle. Perpetual Virginit of Mary. The 13 sects of the Orthodox church. I'm just saying that for a united front. It looks a lot like our protestant churches.
jwbrownlula is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:43 AM   #24
Registered User
 

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 821
Collosians 2:4-10 warns us to not be misled by the traditions of men. I honestly am just pursuing the truth as are you Ryan. I have my view from what my small brain can understand of God. The only hope I see for us is grace through faith. N
jwbrownlula is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:48 AM   #25
|Last of the Gang to Die|
 
TheProdigalModern's Avatar
 

Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Archbishopric of Arkansas
Posts: 2,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by IsaactheSyrian View Post
...
I've run into some fifth columnists from the RC who deny the Theotokos ever died, but Eastern hymnography explicitly affirms her death. It's also worth noting that, while the assumption is considered a historic event (stemming from a pious tradition in the inner life of the Church of Jerusalem), it's not a dogmatic article of the faith in the same sense that Christ's resurrection is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown
The whole reason the Orthodox church split from the Catholic Church was brought upon by difference of opinion on tradition. I see no shortage of heresies such as denial of the immaculate conception, or even sects arguing that Mary was born of immaculate conception. Church history is easily twisted. As far back as Paul we see him write letters trying to iron out confusion.
You've got a breakdown in language here. The Immaculate Conception doctrine refers specifically to Mary, so of course the RC argues she was born of it -- in essence, it was that she was conceived without the burden of original sin, or immaculately. Basically, the belief is that she had to be born that way so that when she would later bear Christ, his human nature would not have any taint of Original Sin. (I feel like I'm representing it poorly, but that's the gist of it.)

In the case of Christ's conception, that's why the term Virgin Birth is always in play. Lots of folks get them confused, because they seem like they should be the same thing ó and they are related, at least within the dogmatic systems that affirm the IC.

As far as I know, no one outside the RC and maybe some Anglo-Catholics affirm the Immaculate Conception doctrine.

The churches in the Christian East specifically affirm that Mary was born under the curse like everyone else so that, when Christ came, he would fully assume the human condition so that it could be fully redeemed. (I am again saying this clumsily. The pamphlet by St. John that Isaac referenced earlier says it better.)

Quote:
I see many arguments among Orthodox about the use of a calendar? There is not this church wide unity.
That stuff's inside baseball, but it's not as big a deal as the Internet makes it seem. While there are two (technically three, or four if you count the Western Rite) calendars in play, everybody believes the same thing and is happy to move between uses as geography requires. The breakaway guys for whom the calendar is a be-all-end-all have about as much influence on the Church as Pope Michael of Kansas does on the RC.
__________________
Disclaimer: Any posts made before Nov. 2010 reflect vastly different stages of my life. I repent for all of them. I am sure this is not the last time I will say it.

[My CGR Blog]

CGR: The Decimation
[A chronicle of CGR's timestream disruption and eventual redemption]
TheProdigalModern is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:48 AM   #26
Obnoxodox
 
IsaactheSyrian's Avatar
 

Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,859
paid
It can be hard to sort out the truth from the dross. The internet is hard that way

What do you mean by '13 sects'? There are 15 autocephalous Orthodox churches worldwide, is this what you're referring to?

If so, the fact that all of these recognize each other as being in communion, concelebrate at each other's liturgies, and so forth, demonstrates unity. The Church is not disunited just because she speaks different languages in different countries. And once I'm Chrismated, I am (in theory) welcome to commune at any canonical Orthodox church in the world, provided I satisfy whatever local requirements are in place (i.e. some priests might require you see them for confession first).
__________________
I believe, O Lord, and I confess, that You are truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief...
~ Ryan Isaac



IsaactheSyrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:52 AM   #27
|Last of the Gang to Die|
 
TheProdigalModern's Avatar
 

Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Archbishopric of Arkansas
Posts: 2,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwbrownlula View Post
I am researching as quickly as possible to defend my statements. There is so much junk out there that I know the truth lies in the middle. Perpetual Virginit of Mary. The 13 sects of the Orthodox church. I'm just saying that for a united front. It looks a lot like our protestant churches.
That's not 13 sects.

It's 14* local churches of a single communion. I don't think you understand our ecclesiology.





*Or 15, depending on how things shake out in North America in the next few years.
__________________
Disclaimer: Any posts made before Nov. 2010 reflect vastly different stages of my life. I repent for all of them. I am sure this is not the last time I will say it.

[My CGR Blog]

CGR: The Decimation
[A chronicle of CGR's timestream disruption and eventual redemption]
TheProdigalModern is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 10:52 AM   #28
Obnoxodox
 
IsaactheSyrian's Avatar
 

Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,859
paid
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwbrownlula View Post
Collosians 2:4-10 warns us to not be misled by the traditions of men. I honestly am just pursuing the truth as are you Ryan. I have my view from what my small brain can understand of God. The only hope I see for us is grace through faith. N
And St. Paul told his disciple Timothy to hold fast to the traditions that were handed down to him, whether by word of mouth or by letter (2 Thessalonians 2:15). So, you know...a blanket condemnation of all 'tradition' as the 'traditions of men' won't cut it.

Everybody's got a tradition. The Sola Scriptura that you inherited from your church? That's a tradition too.
__________________
I believe, O Lord, and I confess, that You are truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief...
~ Ryan Isaac



IsaactheSyrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-06-2016, 11:16 AM   #29
Registered User
 

Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 821
Exactly! This is why I said forgive me when Im wrong. I do not claim to be correct. Only stating what I have read. Where is the truth? Where do we find which traditions to hold fast? We obviously can't trust man. We've screwed everything up we have touched. How do we have a group of intellectuals examine all of the same evidence and arrive at different answers? This is confusion.
jwbrownlula is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-07-2016, 04:11 PM   #30
Gone
 
Ted Logan's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 9,167
I wrote a really long response on my work laptop yesterday, defending Protestantism and sola scriptura, then I closed my laptop and have been in non-stop dad mode ever since. I think when I open my work laptop later, I'll probably just delete it.

TL;DR version: sola scriptura is absolutely a tradition. We just hold that it's a biblical one. All true doctrines are also traditions. Likewise, the perspicuity of the Scriptures. I might say more at some point, but maybe not.
__________________
broccolifish at SoundCloud - synthpop and chiptunes I've made

Give thanks to YHWH, for He is good!


Gone
Ted Logan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:07 PM.


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2