The Bible vs Eastern Orthodoxy
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (53)
sorted by:
So you couldn't answer the questions. You know where that logic leads, to trusting in scripture and not the traditions of your religion.
You don't answer questions with more questions, that's deflection. You can answer and then ask questions to open up another line of thought, but otherwise you are running from the truth.
This reminds me of the Muslims who use the phrase about even the first drink of alcohol being evil, and then they pour out the first cup to then drink the rest.
Do you have trouble stopping at a stop sign by any chance? After all you don't have an interpreter there other than yourself. Or are some messages clear and God is capable of making a point clear to those willing to hear the truth?
You're disporven by the fact of us disagreeing on what certain Scripture passages mean. Do you even logic?
What? I can't read that sentence without my interpreter present. Are you speaking Chinese?
You won't get away from this mess by being clever.
Let's see an example from John 6:
Since you hold that the meaning of God's words are as self-evident as a stop sign and are abundantly clear and straight forward. Do tell, do you eat the flesh and drink the blood of our Lord to get eternal life as He commanded?
Most commandments are self evident, there are few which need interpretation. Is "thou shalt not steal" a head-scratcher? "Call no man father" is self evident, you literally should not call your clergy "father" and CERTAINLY not "holy father" which Roman Catholics do. Simple. If a group breaks such a clear command or even is willing to appear to, then its ruled out from being an obedient church.
It's just like if a church promotes a sodomite lifestyle or gender confusion. The Bible clearly condemns it, such a church should be cut off, no question. There are many such cases.
So yes, you can find some passages that are metaphorical and by definition those require interpretation. God is aware of that (as he is aware of all things). When it comes to salvation, we have sufficient teachings. One can look at a single passage and be confused, but taken as a whole it all makes sense.
Peter said " ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. " [Acts 15:6]
We also see in acts, there is repentance and baptism
Peter said "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." [Acts 2:38]
If there was this need for "sacraments" and other traditions that is the section to mention it. No I don't believe we have a God who withheld that from us and required you meet an Orthodox priest in order to be saved.
We see what is spoken of in the earliest church. Repent, believe, be baptized, receive the Holy Spirit. We see these things. Can we call ourselves conservative if we add to this hundreds of years later (say the 4th century, when some scholars say these additions began)?
Study the scriptures and pray.
Now, it seems reasonable you could already be saved DESPITE extra traditions. If you believe and receive what the apostles clearly write about, then that's wonderful, and I'm happy for that. But getting people focused on ritual, penance and works can definitely lead people away from the gospel shown in the acts of the apostles.