[kosta50]

Isn't that EXACTLY what all the Fathers did? :) Yet, it seems that you accept everything from the consensus patrum as "gospel", and still question what actually IS in scripture

In the Church, the central Scripture are the Gospels. The Gospels are on the altar. The Gospels are carried around the church raised in the air.

The Apostle (Epistles) are on the cantor's stand. They are never carried around the church or raised in the air.

The Homily is on the Gospel readings, not on the Epistle. The Church never treated the Epistles or the Old Testament as one and the same in ranking, that much is clear.

It's not questioning what is Scripture; it knownig where the heart of the scripture is.

Well if you didn't mean it like that, then what did you bring it up for?

I never equated pleasure with sin. You did. What makes sin a sin is a motive, disposition, not what you derive from it. It's what's in your heart that counts.

I do not think Jesus spoke that incoherently. God knocks on eveyrone's hearts. So, Father draws all. But all don't come.

Plus, how can you sit there and question Paul's teachings in scripture when you're quoting me Revelation?

Some of +Paul's teaching is not talked about in the Church (the double-predestination, and the doctrine of atonement, for example). In fact, the Orthodox Church repeats the same readings every year, so there are about 52 or so select sections of the Gospels, Epistles and OT readings (at Vespers and during Great Lent). That hardly covers the hole Bible. It means that although all Scriputre is profittable and good, some parts of it are deemed more important.

[Forest Keeper]

The Homily is on the Gospel readings, not on the Epistle. The Church never treated the Epistles or the Old Testament as one and the same in ranking, that much is clear. It's not questioning what is Scripture; it knowing where the heart of the scripture is.

I can understanding reading from the Gospels more often than other scripture, but it sounds like you have them competing against each other for supremacy. We have our favorites too, but we don't say one book is "truer" than another. We see all scripture being God's infallible word. One book cannot be "more perfect" than another. They are all infallible.

Some of +Paul's teaching is not talked about in the Church (the double-predestination, and the doctrine of atonement, for example).

Well, I will give you full credit for acknowledging that Paul does teach those things. I just have a hard time imagining myself not accepting a major teaching that I, or my system of belief, really thought WAS in the Bible.