Does this mean that you see Jesus as sort of an Apollo (son of Zeus) figure because he was also susceptible to human failings and sin? It seems like you are saying that the condition of Jesus was the same as Apollo's, it's just that Jesus behaved better.
It all depends what "saved" means. To you it means here and now. To us it doesn't. We believe that after death those who in God's eyes are deemed saved will be eternally saved. Those who die unrepentant will remain eternally lost.
While I agree that we disagree on the timing, I can agree that everything you're saying here are true statements.
FK: "BTW, no one is double-predestined to anything. That doesn't even make sense."
That's the most Orthodox thing you ever said! Double-predsetination is the pillar of the Reformed superstition.
Double predestination is simply a one-term expression of two ideas. The first idea is that God is sovereign and He predestines those who will be saved. The Bible is clear that this is so:
Rom 8:29-30 : 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those he predestined , he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
Eph 1:4-6 : 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves.
Eph 1:11 : In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, ...
Now, the second idea is merely the logical inference that we draw from the first. That is, if God predestines some, but not all, that means He does not predestine some, and they will be lost. Doesn't that sound logical? I don't think it's any more complicated than that.
God's "plan" (according to the Reformed): God makes man, God makes man sin, ...
First one true, second one false.
... God is so offended by man's sin he tortures and kills his Son (who is really one and the same God, so he kills himself) so that some men, whom he preordained from all eternity to be saved are saved, and some who are preordained from all eternity to be roasted are roasted. Reformed theology in a nutshell.
What does the word "sacrifice" mean in Orthodoxy? You appear to deny that Christ gave His life willingly. Who do say was the first cause of His death?
Mental note: why does all-knowing transcendental God need a plan?
It's not a matter of need, but of His choice. The Bible says He had a plan so we believe He had a plan. It shows a rational God, not one who is irrational and random. God acts with purpose, not merely reacting to whatever happens outside of His control.
That's ridiculous, FK. I simply said that if Christ in his humanity does not have the potential to sin, then he is not fully human. The difference between Christ and Adam is simply that Christ chose not to sin, that he exhibited perfect obedience.
The Church teaches that Christ is one Person with two unmixed and unconfused natures and wills, one divine and one human. The fact that there is full divinity and full humanity in this hypostatic union is not to be understood as one unduly influencing the other, but rather that each is perfect independently of the other.
Otherwise, Christ's suffering, temptation and death and resurrection would be a charade.
Double predestination is simply a one-term expression of two ideas. The first idea is that God is sovereign and He predestines those who will be saved. The Bible is clear that this is so...Rom 8:29-30, Eph 1:4-6, Eph 1:11,
You mean, St. Paul is clear about that? What Paul says in those verses is an "amalgamated" mish-mash of different saying, mostly found in his other works, and a few out-of-context quotes either from St. Matthew or Deuteronomy (the first one uses the kingdom, which is meant in the Jewish messianic sense, and the second one refers specifically to the Jews; St. Paul uses them as heavenly kingdom and to all respectively).
Double or single predestination, taken in the Reformed sense, simply means that God pre-fabricated some people to be good people and also some to be evil. There is no hint of that anywhere in Genesis. If anything, Genesis 6 tells us that God was "grieved" over man's wickedness. If this were all his predestination, then why would he be "grieved?"
What does the word "sacrifice" mean in Orthodoxy? You appear to deny that Christ gave His life willingly. Who do say was the first cause of His death?
Oh, gee, now we have corrupted even the first cause concept! If Christ died because the Father pre-destined him to die, then Christ certainly didn't do it willingly! You are suggesting that God (the Father), who is without cause, and through whom everything was made, predestined the Son as well! How can that be when the Word was with God and was God in the "beginning?" (beginning of what?).
What Orthodoxy says is that Christ took the sins of the whole world and offered himself to Death in exchange for our captivity. That was his sacrifice. Death couldn't hold him and was thus made powerless. This provided freedom for all humanity, past, present, and future, to come to God once the chains of death have been removed on the Cross. Whether we come to God or not is not is our choice. We believe that God knows our choices but does not make them for us. Nor does he force them on us.
Unlike St. Paul, who keeps saying that God [sic] raised Jesus, we believe that Jesus died willingly and that he rose on his own, being God. But if the Father is greater than Jesus [cf Jn 14:28], or if he owes his life to the Father[cf Jn 6:57], or if the Father predestined the Son to die, as the Bible says or suggests, then we have a problem. And there are many such Christological problems in the New Testament, which is precisely why Christological heresies continue to this day; even eretics use the scripture to "prove" their heresy! Bible is very accommodating indeed.
It's not a matter of need, but of His choice. The Bible says He had a plan so we believe He had a plan
Won't argue the "choice" part, but here does it say in the Bible that God made a plan?