So Irenaesus and Tertullian are heretics for believing in the immortality of all souls???First, Irenaeus did not believe in, or teach the immortality of the soul by nature. The Orthodox teaching on this has never changed.
Second, Tertullian was a heretic because he embraced Montanism which teaches, among other thing, that the prophesies of the Montanists supercede those of the Apostles. I would call that a heresy, big time. You need to get your facts straight, HD.
What Kolokotronis told you is the Orthodox doctrine, always has been and always will be, because even the people you mention as believing in the so-called "immortality" of the soul (by nature) admit that it is not. Even Platonists in the early Church (i.e. Clement of Alexandria) admitted that the soul is not immortal by nature, but by grface.
The immortality of the soul is not its nature (i.e. it is not created immortal) but it is given by God (grace). If God created immortal souls then we would be God. You will just have to do a little more Church Fathers studying before you get the whole picture.
The problem with Tertullian and others on the Latin side (the root of St. Augustine's error, the fillioque error, etc.) is that their misconceptions always started with the poor understanding of Greek, and these, in turn, (mis)led to doctrinal errors.
First, Irenaeus did not believe in, or teach the immortality of the soul by nature.
This is an absolutely incredible statement to make since I have not only posted (#10347) Irenaeus stating specifically that "Souls...are immortal although they once had a beginning." but I posted the link to where Irenaeus makes that comment in Against Heretics, Book 2. It is one thing to say Irenaeus might have held heretical views but it is quiet another to tell me that he didn't say something all the while that I'm reading he did.
Second, Tertullian was a heretic because he embraced Montanism which teaches, among other thing, that the prophesies of the Montanists supercede those of the Apostles.
Come, come now. How many posts have we talked about the Orthodox Fathers have been granted the keys to the kingdom and have the power to redefine what the Apostles stated? In fact I remember in one exchange (could have been here) that it was stated the Orthodox don't allow bishops to marry and are free to reinterpret Paul's direction. What's the difference between your complaint of the Montanists and the way the Church behaves now? In reading about Tertullian I don't see any real substantive argument against him except that he didn't like some of the customs of the Church. I'd have to study it more but he sounds like the first Protestant to be perfectly honest.
The immortality of the soul is not its nature (i.e. it is not created immortal) but it is given by God (grace). If God created immortal souls then we would be God. You will just have to do a little more Church Fathers studying before you get the whole picture.
I have posted numereous references to the fathers and the Catholic website showing this is wrong. If you would like to post your own references I would be happy to study them.
The problem with Tertullian and others on the Latin side...is that their misconceptions always started with the poor understanding of Greek...
Yes, yes. It always comes back to being misunderstood. Jerome didn't understand Greek. Augustine didn't understand Greek. Tertullian didn't understand Greek. Ireaneus didn't understand Greek. No one really understand it except for the eastern fathers who understood. Ireaneus has another quote:
"For that there is nothing whatever openly, expressly, and without controversy said in any part of Scripture respecting the Father conceived of by those who hold a contrary opinion, they themselves testify, when they maintain that the Saviour privately taught these same things not to all, but to certain only of His disciples who could comprehend them, and who understood what was intended by Him through means of arguments, enigmas, and parables."
Iraeneus-Against Heresy, Book II