That just means he was holy, not infallible. Don't go getting all Latin on me FK!
"BTW, among Latins and Orthodox, are there any Saints that one side recognizes that the other doesn't?"
Likely hundreds.
"In truth, I wasn't aware that there was a disagreement between the Latins and Protestants on filioque (but I am no expert on the subject). What is it?"
Long story short, the Latins now accept that the eternal origin of the HS is exclusively the Father. The original raison d'etre for the filioque was to avoid Arian claims that Christ was "less" than the Father and so it was argued that the HS "proceeded from" or had His origin in BOTH the Father and the Son. This seems to still be the theology of most Protestants to the extent its even thought about at all. Its heresy. My suspicion is that if it were thought about, those Protestants would come around, though.
"As proof, I was thinking of Christ teaching in the Synagogue when He was 12. I figure that must have been in Hebrew."
Highly unlikely. People didn't speak Hebrew then. More likely it was Aramaic or Greek.
Responding to my comment that God chose Geek for the NT, you responded:
"And my response is "why is that"?"
I told you, Greeks are bad people and God wanted them to have every advantage!
"...is there something inherently superior to the Greek language itself?"
You ask a Greek a question like that? Ελλα, βραι παιδακι μου!
"So, that led me to think that there really was no "magic" to the Greek, and that God would transmit His word through all languages, both then current and yet to be invented."
But the fact is that the translations we have are all over the lot and those heterodox translations lead to very very different theologies.
"In Calvin's theology, the elect absolutely need access to God's word, be it in oral or written form. Otherwise, we would have to claim an irrational faith, and we do not."
Why would you have to claim an irrational faith if your access to "God's word" (I assume you don't mean Ο Λογος) is not limited to oral and written transmission? Scripture isn't magic, FK. It tells us how to live so we can fulfill our created process. Orthodox believe that is that we all attain theosis; you folks believe that it is eternal salvation for the elect, eternal damnation for the rest, but in either event, the Bible tells us how to conduct ourselves. If Orthodoxy also teaches that through iconography, liturgical life, etc., does that make Orthodoxy "irrational"?
LOL! I'll try to be good. :)
Long story short, the Latins now accept that the eternal origin of the HS is exclusively the Father.
Ah, I didn't know that. Thank you. I agree with you that most Protestants probably don't think it is a huge issue. The scriptures don't appear to be pristinely clear on the subject.
FK: "...is there something inherently superior to the Greek language itself?"
You ask a Greek a question like that? Ελλα, βραι παιδακι μου!
Religion Moderator alert: ABUSE!, ABUSE!, ABUSE! :)
But the fact is that the translations we have are all over the lot and those heterodox translations lead to very very different theologies.
Without minimizing that there are clear differences, I'm not sure it is the translation that really makes the theology. Anecdotally, the first Bible I ever read was an RSV, and IIRC that is an approved version for Latins. I don't remember coming to any Latin conclusions that would seriously contradict what I believe today. I think to a much larger degree it is the totality of the word, plus extra-scriptural works that form theologies on a practical level.
FK: "In Calvin's theology, the elect absolutely need access to God's word, be it in oral or written form. Otherwise, we would have to claim an irrational faith, and we do not."
Why would you have to claim an irrational faith if your access to "God's word" (I assume you don't mean Ο Λογος) is not limited to oral and written transmission?
I'm not sure if I meant "Ο Λογος". I'll have to think about that. :) Anyway, I didn't say that supplemental material to the word would require an irrational faith. I said that the EXCLUSION of the word would require an irrational faith. It wouldn't be based on anything authoritative.
Scripture isn't magic, FK.
But its truth is real power.
Orthodox believe that is [how] we all attain theosis; you folks believe that it is eternal salvation for the elect, eternal damnation for the rest, but in either event, the Bible tells us how to conduct ourselves. If Orthodoxy also teaches that through iconography, liturgical life, etc., does that make Orthodoxy "irrational"?
No. To the extent it is consistent with the Bible in what it represents it is fine and rational.