Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
You remind me of the good and simple folk in Greece and Serbia, who believe from the heart. If you get a chance read Tolstoy's "Three Little Hermits." It's a short story (it's on Google) and it's very, very poignant. When I was growing up, the grownups used to tell me "this is true Orthodoxy." It shows the difference between true faith and institutionalized faith in an exaggerated manner.
But the core of our disagreement lies in your concept of baptism: it holds God's grace hostage to human intellectual "understanding" of faith. In essence you are saying that God cannot bestow His grace on those who cannot understand. That places an awful lot of brain-damaged humans on the train to perdition. God is Mercy and mercy does not require conceptualization of the one who receives it. He spares us.
Baptism is a petition for adoption. God adopts us by His mercy and adoption does not require consent of the adopted child. He does it out of mercy and love for all who ask. It is not our doing, nor something we earn, nor something we "qualify" for at a certain age, not something we understand.
Hey Stripes, thanks. Please consider yourself pinged on all my posts again. I already posted some before I read yours.
Again, welcome back.
Well, they can't repent, which seems to be your formula for receiving God's grace. Those who cannot repent or have nothing to repent for can receive God's grace without repentance.
Being baptized is not something you "qualify" for when you are "old enough." Get real.
As for "splashing," your ignorance is pathetic. We don't splash. The Orthodox submerge three times. The Geek word to "baptize" means to submerge. We will pour water over the head if a baptismal pool is not available. But either way, water is necessary, and biblical.
As for what we believe will happen to the unbaptized babies, your ignorance is again glaringly obvious. The Orthodox firmly believe that God's mercy prevails over any judgment and trust that whatever God does is always merciful and just regardless which one of us it concerns.
Instead of learning something about Orthodoxy, you go on your preconceived notions and hearsay. I am not sure what irks you so much about Orthodoxy, but you need to look into your heart and find out. Perhaps truth hurts?
OK, I was just wondering about the mechanics of baptism's relationship to theosis. I would assume that one cannot reach theosis if one is not "in Christ". Is baptism the only way to accomplish this?
God's grace is not held hostage by our intellect or our acceptance of Him.
Yes, I fully agree. ... So how can you be saying this? :) This idea is along the lines of Irresistible Grace. I'm glad you can buy at least one thing in TULIP. :)
I'm afraid I don't understand what this means. :)
Baptism is not theosis. Baptism in the name of The Holy Trinity is valid regardless of our intellectual ability.
The reason why adults have to believe in order to be baptized is because they have already sinned and must repent. Those who cannot sin (infants, mentally handicapped) have not sinned, so there is no need to repent. God's grace is valid regardless. For those who cannot sin, they will live the rest of their lives forgiven and restored; for those who have sinned, they must repent and seek God to avoid sin because they will continue to sin.
Baptism will wash away any sins that we already have. Theosis is our participation in God's uncreated energies, living a virtuous life in Christ, cooperating with God's will. Two different things, FK.
So how can you be saying this? :) This idea is along the lines of Irresistible Grace. I'm glad you can buy at least one thing in TULIP. :)
Grace is not shoved down our throat against our will. God's grace is there whether we want it or not, whether we understand it or not, whether we know it or not.
That means, FK, that not all "originals" are the same. The oldest New Testament (Sinaiticus) dates some 300 years after Christ. We are reading copies of copies my friend. Welcome to the wonderful world of the Unknown Bible that nobody told you about. And you thought the Bible just dropped from the sky, signed, sealed and delivered by God?
As you go through this journey on the Forum, you will learn that Tradition is not the only thing Protesants should wonder about but that the Bible you read will depend on which "original" was used. :)
I'm not sure of the distinction you are drawing. What is the difference between "born again" and "born of the Spirit"? I see them as identical.
Everywhere else, reference to water in the NT is referring to the washing of Baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I totally agree, with the slight modification of replacing "Everywhere else" with "No where in the Bible". Other than that, we're on the same page. :)
Do you disagree on the concept of "by proxy" on everything else, or JUST faith? And if it is YOUR faith at question, then doesn't that throw the whole "I don't cooperate" idea out of whack?
My faith is very dependent on the idea of proxy. Christ died for me, and paid for and remitted my sins, all by proxy. Such is the nature and power of God. However, in spiritual matters, I don't believe that humans have the power to believe on behalf of other humans. I believe that we are to have a relationship with Christ that is very personal. You can't have a personal relationship by proxy.
So is belief strictly from God without any human response? Does a human have anything to do with being a believer so that he is justified? I sense a contradiction here. You say that Baptism can ONLY be given to believers, as if it was from them, then you say that God ALONE gives ALL faith. So why can't a baby be baptized if it is all from God?
Yes, there is a response from the person at the point of belief. However, this response was predestined by God, and is therefore guaranteed. Unlike me, many believers can't point to a specific day when they "became a believer". They will say things like "I have always believed". That is legitimate, but implicit in that statement is the truth there was by definition a time when the person did not believe because he was too young to know what to believe in.
So, I think it is consistent to say that belief does come from God, and the person must respond to that gift (all of the elect do via predestination). Infants cannot participate in the response, and when you say they do by proxy, then that eliminates free will in the Catholic sense. Why can't I just say that all of my free will, in the Catholic sense, is accomplished by God through proxy? Surely if you say humans can believe by proxy you will allow God to have all of my free will by proxy, won't you?
Not everything Christ taught the Apostles is in writing. Sola scriptura is an innovation of Luther's because he couldn't het a single bishop to join his heresy.
If you believe the Bible came down from heavens signed, sealed and delivered, and deny that human hands and minds had noting to do with it. I have sad news for you: the "original" Bible is an extrapolation.
You go ahead and believe an extrapolation and ignore everything else. Bibliolatry was not what Christ taught. He never once said "Read the Bible" or "Believe only that which is written."
Very good, Kosta mou!
Христос воскресе!
EukardieV eucaristieV. Good hearing from you. :)
FK, my answer got so long -- amounting to a brief history of Greek manuscript traditions, that I will FReepmail it to you rather than burden the thread with it.
Enough said... It appears nothing I said or will say will convince you otherwise.
Regards
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.