tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post495853519625100904..comments2024-03-27T20:28:38.015-04:00Comments on Reasonable Christian: Is Eastern Orthodoxy True?Charlie J. Rayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comBlogger92125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-21316866076555255482013-09-17T08:16:50.377-04:002013-09-17T08:16:50.377-04:00If am so fallible that I cannot understand the inf...If am so fallible that I cannot understand the infallible Bible, neither could I understand an infallible interpretation of the Bible. <br /><br />The Protestant position sees this problem and faces it squarely. If individual men cannot understand the Bible, then neither can an entire council of individual and fallible men understand the Bible.<br /><br />But the Bible nowhere says that we Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-72848529646673608542013-09-17T00:38:35.611-04:002013-09-17T00:38:35.611-04:00I find it extremely amusing that you don't bel...I find it extremely amusing that you don't believe the 66 books are inspired:)Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-22905586327288764602013-09-17T00:36:56.188-04:002013-09-17T00:36:56.188-04:00>>>And my bible has nothing in Jn 10 abou...>>>And my bible has nothing in Jn 10 about appeasing a wrathful God.<<< But your Bible does say something about appeasing a wrathful God and since ALL Scripture is inspired of God, your Bible does teach it:) But you said the Bible said nothing about particular atonement. I could show you other verses but those are the most obvious ones:)<br /><br /> "For I have not Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-28304653701157444882013-09-17T00:34:34.126-04:002013-09-17T00:34:34.126-04:00>>>That's a rather obtuse way of putt...>>>That's a rather obtuse way of putting it. I could say that all the churches accepted a 43 book old testament, plus or minus this or that, so why did you shorten your OT? No church AT ALL accepted that OT canon, circa 1500AD.<<<<br /><br />I see. The Jewish canon didn't exist? And I guess Jerome never translated the Hebrew into the Latin Vulgate? <br /><br />Oh, Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-40757265668728744532013-09-17T00:32:35.725-04:002013-09-17T00:32:35.725-04:00" and you cannot prove your church is the rig..." and you cannot prove your church is the right one. Yet you admit that churches do err."<br /><br />>>>Hmm, I can't prove it in a couple of sentences on some blog discussion. Neither can you prove the bible is true with such limitations.<<<<br /><br />Nor do I claim that the Bible can be proved to be God's Word. Obviously it cannot. But the point here is Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-71771348516736806922013-09-17T00:19:24.527-04:002013-09-17T00:19:24.527-04:00"So your choice of churches is arbitrary and ..."So your choice of churches is arbitrary and capricious"<br /><br />Never said that.<br /><br />" and you cannot prove your church is the right one. Yet you admit that churches do err."<br /><br />Hmm, I can't prove it in a couple of sentences on some blog discussion. Neither can you prove the bible is true with such limitations.<br /><br />"Further, you say the canonJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02977287092917957220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-44911329480168689292013-09-16T23:38:50.255-04:002013-09-16T23:38:50.255-04:005. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of...<i>5. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the Church to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scripture,1 and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole, [which is to give all glory to God], the full discovery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the many other incomparable Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-39017328149448078722013-09-16T23:36:59.249-04:002013-09-16T23:36:59.249-04:00>>>So its [the canon] not from God then, ...>>>So its [the canon] not from God then, its from human will, according to you.<<<<br /><br />God foreordains everything by His decrees, including canonization. However, the canon was chosen by men and that process was fallible.<br /><br />The Bible itself is inspired of God and is self-attesting such that even uninspired men can read it and see that it is God's Word. Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-21936401773430058982013-09-16T23:31:43.320-04:002013-09-16T23:31:43.320-04:00"The Protestant 66 books is neither the small..."The Protestant 66 books is neither the smallest canon, nor the biggest. It's just your arbitrary decision.<<< It was also the decision of both Athanasius and Jerome in the 4th century, both of whom listed all 66 books as inspired Scripture. By the way, the word "arbitrary" comes from Latin. It means the "will". So yes, the canon was chosen wilfully."<brJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02977287092917957220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-61489828133924827312013-09-16T23:30:59.727-04:002013-09-16T23:30:59.727-04:00>>>You'd struggle to show that from t...>>>You'd struggle to show that from the bible.<<<<br /><br />Your ignorance of Scripture is truly appalling. Every school boy knows John chapter 10.<br /><br /> "I am the good shepherd. <b>The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.</b> (John 10:11 NKJ)<br /> "As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and <b>I lay down My life for the sheep</b>. (JohnCharlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-7109832161571049002013-09-16T23:26:41.322-04:002013-09-16T23:26:41.322-04:00>>>Yes well I've studied the word san...>>>Yes well I've studied the word sanctification in scripture, and there is really no hope at all for Protestants to prove that it means what they think it means. And its also impossible for you to show that what the bible calls sanctification is not its central message. Ro 6:22 says the outcome of sanctification is eternal life. Sounds pretty important to me.<<<<br /><br />Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-53263035837799789482013-09-16T23:24:24.270-04:002013-09-16T23:24:24.270-04:00So your choice of churches is arbitrary and capric...So your choice of churches is arbitrary and capricious and you cannot prove your church is the right one. Yet you admit that churches do err.<br /><br />Further, you say the canon is up for grabs since one church shortens it, namely Syria, while the rest accept 66 book plus or minus a few deuterocanonical books. <br /><br />So it's all a source of skepticism.<br /><br />Unless we begin Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-41696350581982090072013-09-16T23:10:09.012-04:002013-09-16T23:10:09.012-04:00any non-Christians, and all too many Christians, a...<i>any non-Christians, and all too many Christians, are of the opinion that science, (i.e., the physical or natural sciences) is an ever-growing body of truth about the universe. The progress of science, its technological triumphs, so we are told, demonstrate its truth. Science is seemingly unassailable. After all, it works doesn’t it? And isn’t success the measure of truth?<br /><br />This beingCharlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-89968035769157991732013-09-16T23:09:18.524-04:002013-09-16T23:09:18.524-04:00"So churches can and do err. And the Syriac c..."So churches can and do err. And the Syriac church claims to be based on "tradition" as well, does it not? It's also an EASTERN church:) So much for the infallibility of tradition and churches. Thanks for the concession."<br /><br />I don't know that its erring to leave a question unanswered, like the status of certain books, but anyway.<br /><br />It's all very Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02977287092917957220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-56720662122440953022013-09-16T23:02:23.629-04:002013-09-16T23:02:23.629-04:00>>>There's got to be an interaction b...>>>There's got to be an interaction between science and bible. You can't just say the value of PI is 3.0 because a cursory reading of 1 Kings 7:23-26 might seem to indicate that. So, there is a struggle between what scientists say is true, and how we interpret the bible.<<<<br /><br />First of all, all truth can be logically deduced from Scripture. The text never says Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-835074764683644462013-09-16T22:47:45.621-04:002013-09-16T22:47:45.621-04:00"Oh? But it is talking about theistic evoluti..."Oh? But it is talking about theistic evolution as the link above shows. "<br /><br />There's got to be an interaction between science and bible. You can't just say the value of PI is 3.0 because a cursory reading of 1 Kings 7:23-26 might seem to indicate that. So, there is a struggle between what scientists say is true, and how we interpret the bible.<br /><br />The reality is,Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02977287092917957220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-88561360838999274232013-09-16T22:40:47.885-04:002013-09-16T22:40:47.885-04:00>>>Then why quote them? The nature of sys...>>>Then why quote them? The nature of systematic approaches is the attempt to fit the bible into a framework which it was never meant to fit into. That you can't quote the bible on its own terms as a sufficient source is very telling.<<<<br /><br />So you're saying do not systematize Scripture while your church systematizes Scripture? HUH? Your logic is brilliantly Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-35495078977349676312013-09-16T22:37:05.647-04:002013-09-16T22:37:05.647-04:00>>>If you read the church fathers... you ...>>>If you read the church fathers... you know, the guys who spoke koine as their native language, you'd know this stuff. Unfortunately, you are too puffed up, thinking of yourself above what is written.<<< Yah, stupid me. I wasted 2 years of college Greek and one year of Greek exegesis in seminary all so I could not read the Greek NT for myself. I should just let the Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-63533016482052390902013-09-16T22:30:33.171-04:002013-09-16T22:30:33.171-04:00>>>the Protestants who are forever morphi...>>>the Protestants who are forever morphing into something new. We don't have that problem. <<< See the You Tube video above:)<br /><br />Eastern Orthodoxy is prone to error precisely because of its emphasis on human freedom and semi-pelagianism.<br /><br />But enough of this. The bottom line is that churches err as you yourself admitted above in reference to Rome and Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-79723995333818805302013-09-16T22:26:35.539-04:002013-09-16T22:26:35.539-04:00The Didache? Please:) You don't follow the D...The Didache? Please:) You don't follow the Didache. You pick and choose.<br /><br />I have read it. Do you believe this part of it? >>><br /><br />And he should not remain more than one day, and if he has a need also another. But if he remains three days, he is a false prophet.<br /><br /> And when the apostle goes forth, he should take nothing except a loaf of bread, until Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-62120097137459957552013-09-16T22:21:20.481-04:002013-09-16T22:21:20.481-04:00>>>That's a complaint better levelled...>>>That's a complaint better levelled at the papists, where one man can do as he will,<<< That's not quite the way the papist magisterium works. They have a council of bishops as you do. They just make the pope supreme over them. But your patriarchs are just as bad as any papist magisterium and worse. Church synods do not have any authority but Scripture. If a synodCharlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-79314590716022697652013-09-16T22:18:45.518-04:002013-09-16T22:18:45.518-04:00That logic doesn't follow at all, and if you e...That logic doesn't follow at all, and if you ever read your bible in Acts of the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch, who couldn't understand the scriptures without help, then you would know why.<<<<br /><br />So that's why Protestants confessions of faith and catechisms. But we are not Apostles nor do we fictitiously claim have the authority of apostles to add new revelations Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-59536720775278410852013-09-16T22:16:22.921-04:002013-09-16T22:16:22.921-04:00>>>Firstly, I dare say an EO service has ...>>>Firstly, I dare say an EO service has 2-3x as much scripture in it than any service in your church. Secondly, at least we're open about the teaching authority of the church.<<< Open is an understatement. What you mean is that your church demands obedience to itself. The Reformation stands on Scripture and Scripture alone. You have added to Scripture and you have done Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-43244387480614019432013-09-16T22:13:50.445-04:002013-09-16T22:13:50.445-04:00>>>The Protestant 66 books is neither the...>>>The Protestant 66 books is neither the smallest canon, nor the biggest. It's just your arbitrary decision.<<< It was also the decision of both Athanasius and Jerome in the 4th century, both of whom listed all 66 books as inspired Scripture. By the way, the word "arbitrary" comes from Latin. It means the "will". So yes, the canon was chosen willfully.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-88307664357928620652013-09-16T22:11:37.615-04:002013-09-16T22:11:37.615-04:00>>>Even atheists and pagans generally rec...>>>Even atheists and pagans generally recognise that there was a guy called Jesus Christ, that he started a church, and that the EO church has historical continuity with that church. <<<<br /><br />Oh, so atheists agree with Eastern Orthodox claims to apostolic succession? Hardly:) You're reaching. <br /><br />If the church is the starting point, why not start with Rome orCharlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.com