Orthodox Practices Origin

[Pravoslavnik]

"In regards to the scriptures you quoted whatever it was that John or the other apostle taught orally in addition to the letters, we have no way of guaranteeing what it was. God did not choose to preserve it for us."

Tim,

Code: Select all

  How, exactly, do you presume to know that God has not preserved the mystical theoria and praxis of the Church through the traditions of Orthodoxy?  How could you know this?

Your concept of the Church, the mystical Body of Christ established at Pentecost, is entirely Protestant.   Let me try to illustrate the distorted nature of your (Protestant) paradigm with reference to your own words.  On this thread, for example, you have repeatedly said things like, "I think that the Church is...(fill in the blank)," "I think salvation is...(fill in the blank)," or "God did not choose to preserve it for us," etc.  
 
Protestants since the time of Martin Luther have had a completely different epistemology, and paradigm of the Church, than the Apostles and the Orthodox.  The Holy Apostles and their Orthodox progeny have always viewed the theoria and praxis of the Church as something mystically given by the Triune God to the Church.  It is not something invented or devised by man, by our rational minds, or via our sensory perceptions, including the visual or auditory perception of scripture.  Orthodox theology is a "fabric woven on high," just as the Apostle Peter wrote in one of his epistles that "the scriptures are not subject to mere private interpretation," but must only be properly interpreted by the saints, the holy ones of God who have the God-given ability to understand them properly.

   Put differently, to the Orthodox, the true Church is not something that you or I can properly create, invent, or re-create to fit our rational, philological concepts of what the Church should be.  The re-creation or rational "invention" of the Church through philology is the very essence of Protestant heresy and error, and this abstract, Protestant "church" is not the mystical Church established at Pentecost.  The theoria and praxis of the Church is a gift of God and his saints, freely offered to us for our salvation. 

In a sense, it does not really matter what you, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Bart Ehrman, Elaine Pagels, or I might theorize or postulate about the path to salvation, grace, etc. What matters is what has been given to us by God through the Church. We can accept it with humility and thanksgiving, or we can reject it through pride and vaingloriousness, imagining that we surely know better than even the Apostles and the saints how to achieve salvation.

Code: Select all

    Contrary to what Martin Luther claimed, the Biblical canon of the Church (scripture) is only one source, [i]and perhaps not even the most important source,[/i] of the total mystical theoria and praxis of the Church.  The ancient, sacramental liturgy and praxis of the Church is surely more important as a source of salvation than the mere rational analysis of canonized scripture.

[sojourner_tim]

I could share your opinion if you could show me somewhere in the Bible that the Bible states it is the ONLY source of authority.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

Although this does not have the exact wording you asked for, from this verse you see scripture is given by God, gives us our doctrine, corrects us, instructs us in righteousness, makes us complete, and equips us for every good work. To me it claims the ultimate authority in our lives. What can tradition offer me that scripture doesn't according to 2 tim?

As regards women headcovering, your opinion is supported neither by biblical sources nor by the words of Saint Paul nor by the comentaries of Saint Paulinus of Nola and Saint John Chrysostomus who never mentionned the question of prostitution whereas for sure they knew better than us the society of this time. But there is already a thread about head covering on this forum.

I know you don't want to get too much into the head covering because there is already a thread but let me add just one more thing. Please bear with me. In this you truly challenged me and i began to research a little more thoroughly what i stated about prostitutes and it seems that there is not really much evidence for that. I made the mistake of assuming there was a lot of evidence to back it up, which was a mistake on my part. However, upon researching this and re-reading the scriptures i found that it seems the passage is actually arguing against head covering, not for it as a cursory reading of it would suggest. I encourage you to check out this link and let me know what you think: http://www.ntrf.org/articles/article_de ... p?PRKey=36

[sojourner_tim]

How, exactly, do you presume to know that God has not preserved the mystical theoria and praxis of the Church through the traditions of Orthodoxy? How could you know this?

I pose this: How, exactly, do you presume to know that God has preservered the mystical theoria and praxis of the church through the traditions of Orthodoxy? How could you know this?

I know that God has chosen to speak to His people through His Word. It was what the Jews based their whole lives on, it was what Jesus quoted when he rebuked the pharisees, saducees, and even Satan. He never quoted the traditions of the time because they were corrupted. My point is not that all tradition is corrupt but rather that there is the possibility of traditions becoming corrupt and God does not guarantee that they will not. On the contrary he warns us that we need to watch out not to follow false traditions Col 2:8 thus showing us that He knew they would eventually be corrupted otherwise he wouldn't warn against it. He never warns us against following His Word though.

you have repeatedly said things like, "I think that the Church is...(fill in the blank)," "I think salvation is...(fill in the blank)," or "God did not choose to preserve it for us," etc.

I have only said "i think" once that i could find. I did say what I believed an average church service should include and I can back that up with scripture (acts 2:42). In regards to salvation i stated what i believed salvation entailed and actually after i said "i believe" everything after that was quoted from scripture (rom 10:9, eph 2:8-9). No one actually answered me if they agreed with me, do you?

The Holy Apostles and their Orthodox progeny have always viewed the theoria and praxis of the Church as something mystically given by the Triune God to the Church. It is not something invented or devised by man, by our rational minds, or via our sensory perceptions, including the visual or auditory perception of scripture.

My point was never that tradition is entirely bad or that all of it is devised by man, it was that in order to follow it it must line up with scripture.

Orthodox theology is a "fabric woven on high," just as the Apostle Peter wrote in one of his epistles that "the scriptures are not subject to mere private interpretation," but must only be properly interpreted by the saints, the holy ones of God who have the God-given ability to understand them properly.

I have never seen in the bible where saints is used of a specific group of people separate from everyone else in the body. I consider myself a saint or a holy one of God thanks to what His Son did for me. And as i quoted earlier the bible admonishes the bereans for searching the scriptures for themselves to see if what paul said was true. The holy spirit teaches us all things and will help us understand the scriptures if we seek Him. Not allowing every believer to interpret the scriptures by the holy spirit is what leads to cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses. The watchtower magazine tells them what to believe because they say they are the only ones capable of understanding the scriptures.

In a sense, it does not really matter what you, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Bart Ehrman, Elaine Pagels, or I might theorize or postulate about the path to salvation, grace, etc. What matters is what has been given to us by God through the Church. We can accept it with humility and thanksgiving, or we can reject it through pride and vaingloriousness, imagining that we surely know better than even the Apostles and the saints how to achieve salvation.

If we do not examine scripture for ourselves and develop beliefs about how one is saved then we put ourselves in the very precarious position of entrusting how we become saved to man or some church. As we both know there are many many different "churches" that claim to know what salvation is and that only they have the correct way when in fact the bible is the only authority that can truly tell us how we are saved. The church is here to relay the message to the world, not create it.

and perhaps not even the most important source,

what you have said here is so very dangerous. The bible itself claims the very opposite. 2 tim 3:15-16

[GOCPriestMark]

The Orthodox tradition is simply the continuity of faith and practice from the beginning unto the present, (and until the second coming).

Take a careful look at what St. Paul tells his disciple St. Timothy, (who was an ordained bishop, having the oversite, of the church in Ephesus after St. John the Theologian was exiled to Patmos):

"And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also."

[Jean-Serge]

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

It remembers me a discussion I had with Jehovah witnesses. I told them that All Scripture does not mean Only the scripture.We do not deny the importance of scipture but assess as sciptures says that that are indications that were given orally... by the apostles but never written down immediately as Jesus spoke but never wrote.

[sojourner_tim]

It remembers me a discussion I had with Jehovah witnesses. I told them that All Scripture does not mean Only the scripture.We do not deny the importance of scipture but assess as sciptures says that that are indications that were given orally... by the apostles but never written down immediately as Jesus spoke but never wrote.

Yeah, it doesn't use the exact wording that you want: "only scripture" but it does give us a list of things that scripture gives us and my point was what could tradition offer me that scripture doesn't? Also, that God does not guarantee that tradition would last forever but he does say his Word will.

It's kinda funny that you said this reminds you of that discussion you had with JWs because I was thinking that this discussion kinda reminds me of a discussion i had with some mormons awhile back. Not that your beliefs are even anywhere close because they deny the trinity among other things but they were telling me that the bible is not the only authority as well. The difference was they were saying the other sources were the book of mormon, journal of discourses, etc. while you said tradition.

[Sean]

Tim,

At the beginning of your thread you claimed to have once been a member of the "GOC." To which GOC jurisdiction did you belong? What parish did you attend? Who was your priest?

Forgive me, but from reading your posts, I don't believe you were ever an Orthodox Christian, much less an Old Calendar Traditionalist. I have seen on many occasions the use of outright fraud on behalf of Protestant sectarians who are proselytizing members of various faiths, in that they claim to have once been a member of that person's faith, and misrepresent it in order to "save" them.

If this is your intention, a cursory reading of these posts will reveal that many of us are adamantine in our Faith, as it is "THE" Faith.

If the Church is not your Mother, God is not your Father. You are not a member of the Church, therefore you have no authority to comment on "our" scriptures, much less teach the members of the Body of Christ about them. There isn't a single thing you could point out to us that we would find new or profound. There isn't a thing you could teach us that we haven't already thoroughly considered and utterly rejected, as many of us are converts from your sectarianism.

I can see this thread going on ad infinitum, since your interest seems only to be that of poaching for souls, and no matter how well one may refute your novelties with the authoritative teachings of the Church, you would still blather on about Sola Scriptura. If you are who you claim to be, then please show us some credentials. If you are just a wolf, trying to disperse the sheep, then please take your sectarianism elsewhere.