Posted on 07/14/2017 10:35:19 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
So let's make this very simple.
If he continued to host a "Bible Answer" show, EXCEPT it was hosted by an Eastern Orthodox group INSTEAD of an "Evangelical" organization, will it OK for them to continue answering questions on the bible THEN?
Will on the protestants on FR then stop pretending that Orthodox Christianity is not "scripture based", and is not "biblical" even though most Orthodox Churches use more scripture in their services than many of their fellow protestants and Orthodox churches can trace their origins to first century Christianity?
Will they stop lying about non-Protestant Christianity and stop claiming "he is no longer the Bible Answer Man" then?
Will they stop saying that by joining the Orthodox Church, he can only host shows about icons and praying to Mary?
Seems like it would easy to resolve this dilemma.
Alrighty, here's your earlier post where you made such comments:
>> The organization and the show was founded by an evangelical minister named Walter Martin. The purpose is specifically to explain Christian Doctrine AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE. <<
34 posted on 7/14/2017, 3:11:20 PM by SeekAndFind
So, if you're NOT saying the Orthodox Church doesn't teach Christian Doctrine AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE, why the complaint that an Orthodox Christian is now hosting a show to explain Christian Doctrine AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE? (emphasis yours)
Aren't non-Evangelical protestants capable of doing exactly that?
If a Catholic Church has a reading from Genesis and the Catholic deacon notes that the Bible says God created man in his own image, so all human beings today are made in the image and likeness of God, the deacon ISN'T "explaining Christian Doctrine AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE"?
If an Orthodox Church has a reading from Jeremiah and the priest tells his congregation that the "before I formed you in the womb, I knew you" line teaches us that God considers all human life is sacred before birth, then the priest ISN'T "explaining Christian Doctrine AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE"?
Quite frankly, I'd trust PLENTY of non-Evangelicals to "explain Christian Doctrine AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE" before I'd trust a card-carrying "Bible belivinin' Evangelical" like pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage Jimmy Carter to explain those same passages.
Why would councils pick and choose epistles and gospels that were not widely read and recognized by the church worldwide?
I Don’t have to cite contemporaneous sources at all. Councils are reflections of community consensus. They come together as a sort of cross advisory group that talk to and refer to each other’s community in order to formalize for posterity what the churches have always recognized.
As for Martin Luther, you over emohasize his initial doubt on the letter of
James. The fact is -— He DID include the epistle in his own German translation of the Bible.
So, I would say that he was prevailed upon by fellow reformers to do so. Had he been part if a council, the epistle if James would still be in the Canon.
Your question is this — would it be ok to host a Bible answer man show as an Eastern Orthodox if the question were all about the bible?
As I said before, how can it satisfy the show’s original supporters when he see’s the bible through the prism of the Orthofox church?
The program cannot divorce itself from the premises the host himself holds. If he holds tradition and give it equal weight as authoritative with scripture as he has to as an Eastern Orthodox believer, then rventually he has to be prepared to answer questions that will make him endorse and defend ideas not found in scripture, or he has to insist that they are.... things like purgatory, prayers to Mary, etc.
Those topics WILL eventually be touched on. This is a 5 day one hour program and those questions cannot be avoided.
That's all any legitimate council ever does.
And the fact remains that there were people within the Church who were not on-board with the final NT canon, right up until the end. Typically this meant that they accepted other books in addition to the usual ones. So, some of "us" knew exactly which books were inspired, but others of "us" didn't.
BTW, your observation really doesn't change anything. Who, in your view, is authorized to recognize that "broad consensus" and make it binding on every believer? In the view of the ancient church, that "who" was a council.
Your question is this — would it be ok to host a Bible answer man show as an Eastern Orthodox if the question were all about the bible?
As I said before, how can it satisfy the show’s original supporters when he see’s the bible through the prism of the Orthofox church?
The program cannot divorce itself from the premises the host himself holds. If he holds tradition and give it equal weight as authoritative with scripture as he has to as an Eastern Orthodox believer, then rventually he has to be prepared to answer questions that will make him endorse and defend ideas not found in scripture, or he has to insist that they are.... things like purgatory, prayers to Mary, etc.
Those topics WILL eventually be touched on. This is a 5 day one hour program and those questions cannot be avoided.
Do you listen to BAM much? They have, for years now, pointed to something they call "the historic Christian faith" as an arbiter of what the Bible can, and can't, mean.
The "historic Christian faith," as far as I can tell, is BAM's name for a somewhat-truncated version of Sacred Tradition. They don't call it that to avoid giving evangelicals a stroke. As any Catholic or Orthodox Christian can explain, that tradition isn't authoritative over the Bible, but is certainly a contributor to the discussion about which competing interpretations of the Bible are legitimate, and which aren't.
Who in my view is authorized?
Well, do you believe in God’s providence and His Holy Spirit guiding His church through the ages? If you do, then the answer should be clear... God’s spirit, the same one that guides every true Christian today guided them AND the churches they represented as they came together to formalize the canon.
Now, if you don’t believe this, then of course, the answer is they picked ans chose as they saw fit. That, by the way, is the liberal view of things.
RE: Historic Christian Church
How far back in history?
I am hard pressed to find practices like prayers to departed saints or Mary or belief in the primacy of the bishop of Rome in the earliest Christian writings.
On these topics alone, you cannot
avoid trying to defend an Orthodox or Catholic point of view of such men were to host the program.
People here want to insist that Orthodox or Catholics can host this show without problematic issues like these coming up.
It can’t be avoided.
If hardcore protestant viewers do not like that the host is now discussing the bible from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, they are free to turn the show off and tune into something else that fits their theological beliefs better. If Hank loses viewers then, its his own fault.
When Jon Stewart took over The Daily Show from Craig Kilborn and changed the direction of the show to preach left-wing politics instead of poking fun at all sides of the spectrum, that's precisely what I did. I didn't demand they fire Stewart or allege that "he can no longer call himself The Daily Show host" because of the direction he's taken the show from its original roots.
>> eventually he has to be prepared to answer questions that will make him endorse and defend ideas not found in scripture, or he has to insist that they are.... <<
Most protestant-to-orthodox converts tend to be pretty fervent in finding a scriptural basis for their newfound theological views, so that would certainly be an interesting challenge to him.
>> things like purgatory, prayers to Mary, etc. <<
You seem to be confusing Orthodoxy with Catholicism. Orthodox Christianity denies the Catholic doctrine of purgatory since the East-West schism (although there's good evidence Eastern Christians accepted it PRE-schism) and reciting the Hail Mary on a rosary is not part of their tradition at all (although they do have many hymns and chants honoring the Theotokos -- as is the proper title for the Virgin Mary in eastern Christianity). If Hank's viewers cannot tell the difference between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, that's all the more reason why he SHOULD continue to be "the bible answer man" and educate them. He no more has to defend Purgatory than a Lutheran would have to defend John Calvin's teachings.
>> Councils are reflections of community consensus.
Your entire thesis seems to be stuck on the odd belief that, with the possible exception of the apostles and authors of the Scriptures, those who have always and everywhere been recognized as the spiritual leaders, doctors, fathers, teachers, and preachers in the Church have actually been the students and followers of the flocks to whom they ministered. Haven’t you mistakenly put the cart before the horse?
There are many legitimate hings that can happen, which can be done:
1. Supporters of the program and the institute can withhold their financial support until the program finds someone who reflects their Biblical view. Some are already doing this.
2. Networks that carry the show can,
cancel it, and many already have. I don’t hear the show anymore in my city, which is a shame, as I am really curious to see the progression of the show.
You talk about tradition. Well if the tradition of the show going back decades is going to be ignored, then I don’t see how protestant and evangelical networks can continue to carry the show.
We cannot pretend to hold and sign on to a Reformed statement of faith, which includes THEIR UNDERSTANDING of the Bible and tradition while at the same time, ignore the differences that exist between the Orthodox view and still be the organization’s front man.
The most straightforward way to do this is to leave the show and form a different one that presents the Orthodox point of view. If the Orthodox churches and members feel that this is a ministry that is worth supporting, they should.
BTW, I am not unaware of the differences between Orthodox and Catholic views, I cite Catholic doctrine to highlight the illogicality of having a Catholic or Orthodox person heading the show.
Once topics like prayers or purgatory come up, and they will based on the show’s format, the differences will have to be explained and defended by the host, and it would not be honest to sign on to a Reformed creed while defending doctrines that are counter to the creeds themselves.
But Mary is not alive. She can’t hear your confession.
Why is the belief odd?
Aren’t the patriarchs all part of the community of faith from Jerusalem to the gentile world?
You seem to think that the patriarchs
themselves cannot be held into account by other elders, deacons and members of the church AND other bishops.
They can no more pick and choose a book or epistle to be inspired when they are not than the members of the council of Nicea can deny the Diety of Jesus Christ.
The Holy Spirit will not allow this to happen to the church of Christ.
>>They can no more pick and choose a book or epistle to be inspired when they are not than the members of the council of Nicea can deny the Diety of Jesus Christ.
I’ve noticed that you have the rather uncharitable tendency to indicate by your remarks that I have made inferences which I haven’t made. For example, I’ve said nothing whatever to suggest that members of early church councils were picking and choosing (willy nilly, as you seem to suggest) which writings were inspired and which were not.
>>The Holy Spirit will not allow this to happen to the church of Christ.
I hear this said quite often and to me it always begs the questions, (1) which “church of Christ” the speaker has in mind, and (2) if the Holy Ghost has His hand firmly on the tiller, why have so many of his purported disciples over the last 2,000 years been led astray and jumped ship?
RE: I’ve said nothing whatever to suggest that members of early church councils were picking and choosing (willy nilly, as you seem to suggest) which writings were inspired and which were not.
OK, if I gave that impression, then I apologize.
All I am saying is this ( and I re-iterate ) -— Scriptures were recognized for what they are because the gospels, epistles and letters were BROADLY accepted by the church at large.
The local councils simply acknowledged it and formalized it for posterity, partly to counter the many false gospels and epistles that were being circulated out there, and partly for the benefit of posterity.
The Christian Church recognized what was Scripture. It did not establish it. This is a very important point. The Christian Church recognizes what God has inspired and pronounces that recognition. In other words, it discovers what is already authentic.
Jesus said “my sheep hear my voice and they follow me . . . “ (John 10:27). The church hears the voice of Christ; that is, it recognizes what is inspired, and it follows the word.
RE: (1) which “church of Christ” the speaker has in mind,
The question implies that there was no a church of Christ that followed the teachings of the apostles from the beginning till the councils.
RE: and (2) if the Holy Ghost has His hand firmly on the tiller, why have so many of his purported disciples over the last 2,000 years been led astray and jumped ship?
Why should this surprise us?
Even from the beginning, we were warned by Jesus Himself that there would be wolves among sheep existing within the church to lead people astray. His warnings were repeated time and again by the Apostles Paul, Peter and John.
Why should that come as surprise?
The Holy Spirit has His hand firmly on those who are willing to follow and obey the gospels and the teaching of Christ’s apostles. The Spirit will pursue ( like He did St. Paul ) those who are outside the fold but there will be deceivers in all ages who will attempt to lead people astray.
It says so in the gospels and the epistles.
Oh By the way, here’s one thing I believe you and I can agree on — Praying for Hank Hanegraaf’s health.
As you know, Hank has been diagnosed with a rare form of cancer and is currently undergoing chemo therapy. The treatment can be very debilitating at times.
Let us pray that the Lord’s healing be upon him.
Thanks for the comprehensive links, NRx.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.