I thought the Apostles writings were divinely inspired by God, written by God through men. Isn't that what the Church teaches? The same can't be said for +Basil the Great or +John Chgrystotom. At least the early church fathers specifically pointed out what writings were divinely inspired. Now it seems the Church considers the writings of the early church fathers, in some cases, to be inspired writings when they never stated it to be so.
It is interesting to note how you really seem to have a problem with St. Paul. This is remarkable considering the fact that Peter told us to listen to his teachings and he wrote about 2/3 of the New Testament.
Please tell me, show me, what have the Orthodox changed?
Can bishops (priests) marry? Didn't we discuss this somewhere back on this thread? I know, you guys will say this isn't theology but Church discipline. A change is a change.
Yes. Jewish dietary laws were divinely inspired too. If that is true, then the NT's release from dietary restrictions sounds like God changed His mind.
Now it seems the Church considers the writings of the early church fathers, in some cases, to be inspired
Never.
It is interesting to note how you really seem to have a problem with St. Paul
I don't have a problem with +Paul, nor do I reject him. I find some of his theology interestingly different not only from what the Church holds (such as his doctrine of redemption), but how different it is from the accounts written by the Apostles who actually walked with Christ.
+Paul's vocabulary and theology change. He uses novelties, such as calling the faithful 'saints.' In the Philippians he says that Christ existed in the "form of God" (2:6), and in the Romans he says that not the hearers, but the doers of the Law will be justified (2:13).;
I do have a problem with people who proclaim +Paul to be inspired and therefore his writings to be the word of God, yet blatantly ignore those passages they find "unfitting" for their purposes. Such as the already mentioned restrictions +Paul puts on women speaking/preaching in church, or women being covered in church.
This kind of phenomena are observed only in Protestant churches in which, by and large, +Paul stands out as the defining theologian of the NT.
If his words are not his but God's then these restrictions are absolute not relative, or subject to fashion and social norms. Yet they are related as such.
Can bishops (priests) marry?
Priests yes; bishops no. The Church implemented many disciplines that were needed or were considered profitable for the well-being of the faithful; some were in response to changing times, some were in response to different cultures. But that is not theology.
For instance, the 40-day fast before Nativity and Resurrection was implemented by +John Chrysostom 1,600 years ago. The Church documents explain why it was deemed necessary and good for the faithful to follow those, but no one remotely familiar with the Church will confuse them with theology. I find strict rules applied to everyone patently wrong, particularly dietary ones. But the Church reminds us that "do no harm" applies to you as well as others.
I would like you to show me where the Orthodox Church changed its teachings (theology), not vestments and discipline, but if you want to lump them together, that's your prerogative I suppose.
I'm not sure how much of this in the EOC, but these are all inventions post canon:
Purgatory,the Mass, transubstantiation, indulgences, the treasury of merit, penance, the rosary, prayers to Mary, holy water, the papacy.