Posted on 04/10/2017 6:40:46 PM PDT by fishtank
Evangelical Apologist Hank Hanegraaff Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy
Posted by: Rob Bowman
On Palm Sunday, April 9, 2017, Hank Hanegraaff formally joined the Orthodox Church. Since 1989 Hanegraaff has been the President of the Christian Research Institute (CRI) and (since ca. 1992) the host of CRI’s Bible Answer Man radio program.[1] Hank, his wife Kathy, and two of their twelve children were inducted by a sacramental rite called chrismation into the Orthodox faith at St. Nektarios Greek Orthodox Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, near where CRI is based. In chrismation, a baptized individual is anointed with oil in order to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.[2]
(Excerpt) Read more at religiousresearcher.org ...
If one meditates on the scripture, and the adversary does not snatch that seed away, one could notice the Messiah taught to do alms (works of mercy), pray, and fast. Those are His works, works of faith. Compare with James about faith and works.
And here we have the crux of the whole matter, the centuries old dispute between Protestant "restorationists" and all the ancient liturgical churches. The two sides continue to continue talking right past one another, and will continue to do so until one or the other or both cease to be chrstians.
The ancient liturgical churches aim Paul's antinomian critique against the Torah of Moses alone. Protestant restorationists apply it across the board, declaring all legal/ritual/ceremonial systems to be inadequate and useless. Why? Because the Biblical system is abolished and "later on" in the "very same bible" (the "new testament"), but that "very same bible" doesn't replace it with anything. Therefore the Protestant restorationist reasons, if this is the case with a legal/ritual/ceremonial system that actually was authorized by G-d Himself, then how much the more so (a Jewish form of reasoning known as "qal vachomer" or "`al 'achat kammah vekhammah") is any other such system abolished? For some reason the liturgicals seem unable to understand this very simple logic, so they continue right on applying Pauline antinomianism to the Biblical rituals while justifying allegedly superior post-Biblical rituals that were allegedly never abolished because they didn't even exist yet!
Traditional Fundamentalist Protestantism recognizes the "passion" as a vicarious eternal damnation visited on "the son" by "the Father" in the place of every single human being who would ever live. Such a loophole obviously makes all rituals and ceremonies superfluous; yet while the Biblical ceremonial is (G-d forbid!) rendered "unnecessary" by this logic, it is no more "unnecessary" than any other legal/ritual system.
The liturgicals don't see their hypocrisy in "preaching Protestantism to the Jews and Judaism to the Protestants." They continue to sound like a Southern Baptist when it comes to the Law of Moses while sounding like a rabbinic sage when it comes to the post-Biblical ceremonial and morality of historical chrstianity.
No wonder the ancient churches deny that the "passion" was a vicarious eternal damnation whose sole purpose was to create a "loophole." If this were the case, their religious rituals would be groundless (they charge they themselves make against Judaism). Small wonder they deny not only "total depravity," but in the case of the Eastern Orthodox even "original sin." But anyone who grew up with the logic of Protestant restorationist antinomianism will see the double-standard here: man didn't "fall" far enough to need the Calvinist "loophole," but fell just enough that the Law of Moses was rendered inadequate and something else was needed to take its place (G-d forbid!).
Furthermore the rejection of the "passion" as a vicarious eternal damnation inflicted by "the Father" on the "son" explains the traditional charge of the ancient churches that the Jews are guilty of "deicide" (a non-existent crime, since G-d can't be killed). There is no room in Calvinism for hating the Jews for acting as the sacrificing priest. Meanwhile, the liturgicals not only insist on the necessity of the "passsion" but then hate the Jews for performing the necessary slaughter of the "victim." Small wonder Calvinism is the only version of chrstianity that doesn't share the traditional mania against the Jews.
While I defend the Protestants here with regard to the logic of their conclusions (as opposed to the hypocrisy of their critics), it must be understood that I do not defend Protestantism as "the true chrstianity." There is no such animal and never has been. So long as Protestants insist that their correction of the illogic of the ancient churches restores some sort of ancient, original, lost chrstianity, they will continue to be foils to their liturgical enemies. But they have so painted themselves into the corner of needing a vicarious eternal damnation rather than any other remedy that they can't let it go. Even the argument of ahistoricity makes no dent on them because if it isn't true they will all have to be eternally damned, therefore it simply cannot not be true.
I wish more people would wake up.
Could you perhaps, point us to the posts where the non-Catholic Christians call Catholics *heretics* for not agreeing with Evangelical doctrine?
I'ave seen the term *heretic* thrown around a lot at others BY Catholics but not AT Catholics.
Please provide the links to said posts.
Hey bro, you and I know what it means to "believe" but unfortunately, you have to completely define the concept.
Others engage in cult speak, and the word conjures up a different meaning in their minds. I have had Mormons, JWs, Iglesia ni Cristo, Quiboloy tell me they "believe" but you know they don't, because they are practicing cult speak.
If you think some of the people here, are hard to deal with, wait till you take on the Iglesia ni Cristo. That is a real, honest to goodness cult. I won't even discuss spiritual matters with them anymore.
Hank Hanegraaff must have been too good for Rome, got oiled by the Greeks.
Neither because our righteousness is not our own nor a result of our own works.
A believer's righteousness is Christ's righteousness credited to our account when we believe.
Mankind's attempts at righteousness is equivalent nothing more than a two year old's scribbling with crayon on the Mona Lisa, and that even falls far short as an analogy.
Or digging a ditch and claiming it's the Grand Canyon.
Is that a serious question???
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6)
What is it you think people should wake up to? Is Jesus the promised Messiah, the Kinsman Redeemer, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, or is he not and are you expecting his appearance still?
“...one of Frank Schaeffer’s more recent books was called “Why I am an Atheist Who Believes in God.” I’ll never know what he meant by that...”
I just saw this thread today.
I know Franky Schaefer was a big fan of Luis Buñuel who’s famous quote is “I’m still an atheist, thank God”.
“TODAY many people have a “Jesus, but not religion” attitude. This appeals to the innate libertarian streak many Americans have...”
It’s nothing to do with libertarianism, but you are correct about it being American.
Lots of un-americans simply don’t get it and don’t know how America came to its greatness.
And falling away from this understanding or never having it is evident in our decline.
I wish more people would wake up.
What is it you think people should wake up to? Is Jesus the promised Messiah, the Kinsman Redeemer, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, or is he not and are you expecting his appearance still?
I am most definitely not expecting a "messiah" who "takes away the sins of the world." Such a "messiah" is no "messiah" at all but a chrstian fantasy.
Do you never get tired of being the foil to the Catholics, Orthodox, Non-Chalcaedonians, and Nestorians (assuming there are any) on this forum? Don't you know that according to genuine historical chrstianity J*sus never died for your sins to begin with? He died to put an end to Judaism and start a new religion.
Ask the jokers on this forum.
See #186 this thread ...
How about Baghdad Bob, we will roast their stomachs in Hell.
I woke up in 1970, to the realization, that Jesus of Nazareth IS the Messiah, who came, specifically to die for my sins, so by believing, to the saving of the soul, I can go to Heaven. If people don't want Heaven, they better be ready to endure a ton of fiery pain in Hell. It really IS that simple.
See #181 on this thread.
All the Protestant apologetics in the world can't change the fact that Protestantism and Protestant notions of "atonement" never existed until the sixteenth century. But do continue spinning your wheels.
Protestants are faced with the uncomfortable choice of rejecting everything about chrstianity that ever made sense or rejecting chrstianity altogether. I strongly suggest the latter.
Nonsense ... are you a Talmudic Jew?
No, I never do get tired of speaking the truth to whomever the Lord leads me on these forums. Heck, I even dialog with you. :)
I’m not sure who told you that about the Messiah not being the sin bearer, that it was a fantasy of Christians. They are not only wrong, they have to ignore quite a bit of prophecy that foretold hundreds of signs about who the Messiah would be as well as what he would come to do. I have several links to point you to if you genuinely want to know. The enemy of our souls - the devil - would love nothing more than to keep people in the dark and deceived about the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Don’t fall for his trap.
However, to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David proclaims the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: (Romans 4:5,6)
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.