Posted on 01/27/2008 7:56:14 PM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
The one who "authorizes" is the one in authority. It doesn't make a difference. In your theology, the HS is taking orders, or accepting authority from Jesus. That subordains the HS.
The Holy Spirit does as he pleses as far as I know
That contradicts what you said about Jesus authorizing the HS.
You are tripping all over yourself here, espousing two contradictory beliefs:
1) that Jesus "authorizes," i.e. gives authoirty to, empowers, the HS. and 2) that the HS does as He pleases (as far as you know [sic]?)
Do you have a problem with John 15:26? Jesus clearly will SEND the Councelor (Holy Spirit) to his followers. So Jesus does authorize the Holy Spirit to come. Same with 16:7.
The only thing that was rendered obsolete was the Old Covenant(cf Heb 8), and that was beforereligion, i.e. organized faith, and never said He came to change that.
The Body of Christ, the called out ones(church), or the flock(sheep).. are metaphors about "the family of God".. Which is a "family"
Sounds like something the LDS would come up with...that's not Christianity either.
an organization.. or club.. i.e. like a current church..
The Church is not a club or an organization; it calls itself an Organism, with a Head and a Body.
I believe every human ever born is a spirit in a body suit.. That they were spirits before incarnation and will be after incarnation..
I respect your belief. But I do want to make it clear that the pre-existence of the souls is (a) pagan (b) Jewish and (c) Gnostic belief.
And are NOW spirits and that is what the metaphor of being born again means.. Realizing you are basically a spirit and not flesh at all.. and should start conducting yourself as an eternal being NOW..
And what is the basis for your belief that we are spirits and not flesh? And how should an eternal being conduct itself and how do you know?
Who is the messiah?.. God coming to this planet personally to encode this message in his parables which are metaphors..
Why parables and metaphors?
To lead those that are willing into reality..
Okay.
What reality?.. That they are spirits that will live eternally
Did the spirits also exist "eternally?"
The reason for his doing this is I think to shut the mouth of any that would say(at some time) why didn't you openly.. approach me face to face..
And why doesn't he?
Thats a primer about what I believe about the messiah.. not all but a start to tell it all would not work in this venue.. I skipped over so much.. but you asked..
Is this your own belief or are there others? And what do you base your belief on? Inspiration? Bible? Visions? Messages? What methods do you use to authenticate these answers?
Old reads: that was beforereligion, i.e. organized faith, and never said He came to change that.
Should read: and that was before the Messiah. As far as I can tell from the NT, jesus practiced and participated in the Jewish religion, i.e. organized faith, and never said He came to change that.
Apologies
the_conscience: No doubt you base this upon incontrovertible empirical data, using the same methodology as your Bible criticism, and have all the evidence to prove that all the rituals and dogma of the Greek church is directly handed down from the Apostles. (BTW, that would exclude any indirect references to old testament Jewish customs)
The New Testament tells us that the Church received the faith from the beginning and that the Apostles were there to receive it.
The point I was making, which you seem to have missed, is that at the end of the 4th century the Church canonized the New Testament. At that same time, the Church doctrines and worship are known and documented (two Ecumenical Councils, Trinitarian dogma, the Creed, the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil, etc. along with Church fathers, Cappadocian Fathers and the desert Fathers proclaiming one and the same orthodox and catholic faith in "word and in epistles").
So, to answer your question, Yes, there is objective evidence that the Orthodox Church today teaches and believes and serves the same divine liturgy as the Church served, taught and believed at the time of NT canonization. This objective evidence is in the fact that we serve both the shorter (St. John Chrysostom's) and the full version of St. Basil's Divine Liturgy, and that we teach the same doctrines taught by the Church at the time of its NT canonization.
You can't ,on the one hand, give Church credit for knowing which books are inspired, and on the other deny its knowledge of the word of God, it's doctrine, or it's proper ancient form of worship.
Of course you can.
Nothing and no one is perfect except Christ.
No, because the Apostles were Jews and worshipped as Jews. There are a lot of Jewish elements in the Divine Liturgy of St. The evolution of Christian worship can be discerned from the Didache and writings of St. Justin Martyr, as the ealriest documents attesting to this.
The Liturgy of James the Just (the oldest Christian Liturgy which is in its fixed portion for all practical purpsoes the same liturgy as that of St. Basil and Chrysostom, except that it has more OT references).
Again, you war against Scripture...
"For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth" -- Romans 9:11
You two insist on a works-based salvation when the Bible tells us over and over that our own works are as filthy rags to God, and we are only saved by Christ's work on the cross alone.
If anyone has wandered why I have not responded to any of your posts, it’s because I have decided to spend more time in deep prayer.
I wish you all a blessed evening!
Dr. E: Of course you can
Sure, but you will have to produce evidence that shows why did the Church recongize the inspired text from the profane writings but didn't know what it was doing, teaching or worshiping.
Amen!
Good works are the evidence of our salvation, not a requirement for it.
Nothing can merit God's mercy except Christ on the cross, by whose stripes we are healed.
Where do we see yours? Hating a group of people, last time I checked, isn't a "good work".
My partner is Jewish, the son-in-law of a former Chief Rabbi of Budapest. Every time he attends a service or a Divine Liturgy at our Greek Orthodox Church, he comes away marveling that he could have been at a Temple ceremony, as he understands they were, except for the obvious differences. His father-in-law has confirmed this to me many times. You’re going to have to look elsewhere for evidence undermining the continuing and ancient character of our Divine Liturgies, tc.
What kosta has presented is what those of us who are Orthodox have been saying here on FR for years. We believe the same things and worship God in the same way as the bishops who determined the canon of the NT in the 4th century. This is just a statement of historical fact. Personally, I don’t understand why Christians who are committed to the notion that the HS inerrantly guides its people to correctly interpret scripture have a problem accepting what is simply history.
Where do we see yours? Hating a group of people, last time I checked, isn't a "good work".
Oh oops. I'm sorry Dr. Eckleburg I though I was addressing a different poster. That comment was not meant for you. I apologize.
No, just a rmeinder, as mark pointed out to you, that the reformed theology steps all over its toes.
Romans 9:11...You two insist on a works-based salvation when the Bible tells us over and over that our own works are as filthy rags to God, and we are only saved by Christ's work on the cross alone
That is the deformed interpretation of the Reformed theology. And even if St. Paul were to say what you say he says (out of context), it would not be the entire "Bible" but only St. Paul, in Romans.
Let's get that straight, and agree on this: St. Paul is not the Bible. And his wiritngs are not to edify the orthodox but to correct the deviant chruches. So, it is somewhat ironic that so many deviants looked at him as the Bible (Gnostics, Marcion, and the Reformation)
The misperception is yours, Mark.
If we believe, it is because God has given us faith.
If we believe, it is because God has given us new ears and new eyes and a new heart with which to believe.
If we believe, it is because God has named us to His family from before the foundation of the world.
And at a time of God's choosing, we will believe and know our salvation is by Christ's atonement alone.
Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." -- Ephesians 1:4-6"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
We either believe God's word, or we don't.
***The New Testament tells us that the Church received the faith from the beginning and that the Apostles were there to receive it. ***
There’s your problem. Churches don’t receive faith, people do. The Church received the NT which the Apostles and others wrote with the help of the Holy Spirit.
Giving them scripture isn’t hating them.
Oops, now I see your apology. My bad.
***Let’s get that straight, and agree on this: St. Paul is not the Bible.***
You’ve got to be kidding me.
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.