Kolo-Not at all, HD. That is precisely what Christ did.
Youd win that bet assuming you found someone uneducated enough to take it. HD, Kostas post laid out clearly what Orthodoxy believes about atonement and certainly +John Chrysostomos Paschal Sermon states our belief in a most eloquent form.
This is a rather silly argument in my mind. Both the Orthodox and Catholic say they are inerrant in their doctrine based upon the fathers; yet they have two different and distinct doctrines. I would wager to say that if the Holy Spirit job is to guide people to all truth, then the Orthodox/Catholic position should be virtually the same given they are the "true" church. Given the fact that they are different should be an indication that they are not divinely inspired.
Tell me, do you believe in the Pope's infallibility? That is one of the Holy Spirit guiding "to all truth" for the Catholics. So who's right?
Long post....
“You accused M-L-G of holding heretical doctrine about Cain and here you are doing the very same thing with Moses. What’s the difference?”
HD, I did not. I have no idea what that person believes vis a vis Cain. In any event, I know how to say heretic and heresy and have on multiple occasions here. Being called a heretic doesn’t bother me in the least. It shouldn’t bother any of us who are convinced of the “orthodoxy” of our beliefs. As I said before, all of this has to be taken whence it comes.
“Quite frankly, Kolo, I’m not at all impress with the way the fathers are used here. I find things in them that are contrary to what is the doctrine of both the Orthodox and Catholic Church and the response I get is, “Well, that’s not what the Church teaches.”
But in a nutshell that’s an appropriate response because what The Church teaches is, among other things, doctrines which arise from and are consistent with the consensus patrum. It means nothing that you can find quotes from the Fathers which are contradictory to what The Church teaches. Those contradictory comments are outside the consensus patrum. Some of the comments are, or border on heresy. The Fathers were not infallible and Orthodoxy has never taught that they were...that’s something we’ve left to the Latins and even they seem to apply that infallibility only to Popes, though I’d argue they’ve raised Blessed Augustine to that level too.
“I would wager to say that if the Holy Spirit job is to guide people to all truth, then the Orthodox/Catholic position should be virtually the same given they are the “true” church.”
As institutions with a major “human” component, I’d say that our positions are remarkably the same in virtually all areas. Many of the differences are in “traditions” (small t) and praxis; they are apparent but not fundamental. On the other hand, there are differences which are profound, most (but not all) of them running back to +Augustine’s writings and the interpretation and importance the Church of Rome gives to them.
“Tell me, do you believe in the Pope’s infallibility?”
As defined by Vatican I? No; it is a 19th century Roman innovation and an unfortunate and pernicious one at that.