Eastern Orthodoxy and the wrath of God

[Rebel]

You are either naive or Biblically illiterate!

Neither. But thanks for the insult.

 

[Rebel]

Denying the clear teaching of Scripture is not contributing knowledge. If anyone believed you you would be contributing confusion!

if you think what you and others believe is the clear teaching of scripture, you see something there that the early Christians did not. You do realize that penal substitution was unknown before the Reformation, don't you?

 

[Rebel]

If some of you want to believe an atonement theory that perverts the gospel and impugns the nature of God, go ahead, but I couldn't believe it and be a Christian.

 

[BobRyan]

I've read the apostles and prophets very closely, and I don't see any satisfaction or penal substitution views in them. And neither did the early church. That's why those atonement theories were absent in the early church .

well many of us consider the first century to be "early" in the "early church" so when we read things like "He is the Atoning Sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE World" 1 John 2:2 - we beg to differ with those placing the tradition of man above what we find in the actual Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

On searching the forum, I found at least two people who hold similar beliefs on this as I do, one of whom was banned. So, since this has been represented here previously, I suppose there is no need for it to be rehashed by me. I guess I should simply cease to post on this subject. No minds will be changed anyway.

One interesting thing I have found over the years is that not everyone wants to learn facts, unless those facts confirm what they already believe. In other words, very few really want to know the truth wherever it may lead. But for me nothing less will do, and I've searched and researched for years to find it, trying as best I could to set aside any presuppositions I was raised with.

So, carry on. I'll politely bow out now.

In many respects you are right - but learning has not entirely ceased here, so post away. State your beliefs - but do not rely on your entire argument being carried outside of the Bible because doing so will not work.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

if you think what you and others believe is the clear teaching of scripture, you see something there that the early Christians did not. You do realize that penal substitution was unknown before the Reformation, don't you?

Was Isaiah 53 "unknown before the Reformation"???

But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9 And they made His grave with the wicked—
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.

10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.

New King James Version (NKJV)

in Vs 8 - NASB
By oppression and judgment He was taken away;
And as for His generation, who considered
That He was cut off out of the land of the living
For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due?

Was Eph 1:7 not known before the "Reformation"?

7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace

Was 1 John 2:2 - not known before the "reformation"??

"He is the Atoning Sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE World" 1 John 2:2 NET, NIV

Wycliff on IS 53:10
10 and the Lord would defoul him in sickness. If he putteth his life for sin, he shall see (his) seed long enduring, and the will of the Lord shall be (ad)dressed in his hand. (yet the Lord defiled him with suffering. He made his life an offering for sin; and so he shall see his children, or his descendants,

 

[Revmitchell]

You are not my conscience. I tried to contribute some knowledge to the discussion.

You do not know anything about me.

All you are is an instigator and false accuser of the brethren. This is very evident from reading your past posts, which I have done. Do you have any honor?

What lacks honor is pretending to be someone you are not. You are in fact Michael Wrenn.

 

[OldRegular]

Bob Ryan

If I had to pick a favorite chapter in the Bible it would probably be Isaiah 53. That chapter, given several hundred years before the birth of Jesus Christ, makes so clear to those who are willing to believe, what Jesus Christ accomplished on the Cross. He took the penalty that was due us and in my mind that is penal substitution!. There are an abundance of Scripture in the New Testament that support Isaiah 53!

 

[OldRegular]

Greek Orthodox church on wrath of God

Just doing some quick scans it does appear 'the wrath of God' is indeed an issue with them.

They were about as bad as Baptists. Some believed the Bible and some did not!

 

[BobRyan]

What lacks honor is pretending to be someone you are not. You are in fact Michael Wrenn.

Who is he pretending to be???

 

[rsr]

As someone who a few years back spent a couple of years seriously considering converting to Eastern Orthodoxy (and was even a CATECHUMEN for a couple of months), your post really resonated with me.

Since you are a former catchumen, I would not presume to disagree with what you were taught.

I would make a couple of observations. First, certainly the Orthodox would not accept penal substitution as being a valid explanation of the atonement.

Second, while some Orthodox may indeed reject the wrath of God (there's a lot of that going around these days, with folks throwing out the baby of substitution with the bathwater of penal satisfacation), some of the disagreement may be on semantics. Certainly the Orthodox fathers had no compunction about upholding the wrath of God; Chrysostom repeatedly mentions the wrath of God and says of Christ that "His advent arrested the wrath of God, and caused us to live by faith."

Yet Chrysostom's view of the wrath of God may not square with that of Western theologians (especially those of the Protestant Magisterium).

For if the wrath of God were a passion, one might well despair as being unable to quench the flame which he had kindled by so many evil doings; but since the Divine nature is passionless, even if He punishes, even if He takes vengeance, he does this not with wrath, but with tender care, and much loving-kindness; wherefore it behooves us to be of much good courage, and to trust in the power of repentance. For even those who have sinned against Him He is not wont to visit with punishment for His own sake; for no harm can traverse that divine nature; but He acts with a view to our advantage, and to prevent our perverseness becoming worse by our making a practice of despising and neglecting Him. For even as one who places himself outside the light inflicts no loss on the light, but the greatest upon himself being shut up in darkness; even so he who has become accustomed to despise that almighty power, does no injury to the power, but inflicts the greatest possible injury upon himself. And for this reason God threatens us with punishments, and often inflicts them, not as avenging Himself, but by way of attracting us to Himself.

First Exhortation to Theodore After His Fall

 

[BobRyan]

I would make a couple of observations. First, certainly the Orthodox would not accept penal substitution as being a valid explanation of the atonement.

Second, while some Orthodox may indeed reject the wrath of God (there's a lot of that going around these days, with folks throwing out the baby of substitution with the bathwater of penal satisfacation), some of the disagreement may be on semantics. Certainly the Orthodox fathers had no compunction about upholding the wrath of God; Chrysostom repeatedly mentions the wrath of God and says of Christ that "His advent arrested the wrath of God, and caused us to live by faith."

Yet Chrysostom's view of the wrath of God may not square with that of Western theologians (especially those of the Protestant Magisterium).

First Exhortation to Theodore After His Fall

I see a lot of discussion there - and almost no Bible in their case. Even on page 1 the idea is to simply condemn anyone who would dare to think of making a Bible case that is not in harmony with the EO position.

Two topics are being discussed.

1. Did the Father pour out His wrath on His Son?
2. Does God pour out His infinite wrath on sinners in the lake of fire?

"God so loved the World that He gave His only Son" -- not that He was wrathful or hated or angry at His Son - but rather He gave His Son as substitutionary atoning sacrifice for "our sins" and "not our sins only but for the sins of the whole world" 1 John 2:2.

The wrath of God against sin - His Love for the sinner - His attribute of being perfectly just as well as full of mercy -- all must be satisfied for God "IS Love" 1John 4.

Too loving to let the cancer of "sin" destroy His creation. And too loving to forsake all who have sinned without providing for them the very most expensive Gospel.

Even so Rev 14:10 is clear that in the very presence of the "Lamb and of His angels" the wicked will be "tormented with fire and brimstone". All of it not only in HIS presence but "in the presence of His angels".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Revmitchell]

Mat_3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Luk_3:7 Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Luk_4:28 And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath,
Luk_21:23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
Joh_3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
Act_19:28 And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesians.
Rom_1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom_2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
Rom_2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Rom_4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Rom_5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
Rom_9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Rom_12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Rom_13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Rom_13:5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Gal_5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Eph_2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Eph_4:26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:
Eph_4:31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
Eph_5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
Eph_6:4 And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
Col_3:6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
Col_3:8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
1Th_1:10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.
1Th_2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.
1Th_5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,
1Ti_2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
Heb_3:11 So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)
Heb_4:3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
Heb_11:27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.
Jas_1:19 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
Jas_1:20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
Rev_6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Rev_6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
Rev_11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.
Rev_12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
Rev_14:8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
Rev_14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
Rev_14:19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
Rev_15:1 And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
Rev_15:7 And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever.
Rev_16:1 And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.
Rev_16:19 And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.
Rev_18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
Rev_19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

I've read the apostles and prophets very closely, and I don't see any satisfaction or penal substitution views in them. And neither did the early church. That's why those atonement theories were absent in the early church and for a thousand years thereafter. Those later theories were formulated based on a legal view of God, man, and the work of Jesus, in other words, a view based on courtroom justice. These theories were a product of the times and the culture. The Eastern Church escaped these innovations and held to the original views.

Characterizing my views of the early church as simplistic is very misguided. The Orthodox view of the atonement is what was held by the early church, the fathers, and it held sway for 1000 years, until Anselm's Satisfaction theory. That is not conjecture on my part, not bias, not opinion, but objective, historical, scholarly fact. If you cannot or do not wish to deal with the facts, that is your problem, not mine.

Apparently you missed (or ignored) what I posted earlier in this regard, so I'll post it again...

Here's a brief article providing documentation from the early church fathers of belief in the substitutionary aspect of the atonement:

https://readytoreason.wordpress.com/...-early-church/

Whatever other motifs were used to describe the Atonement, the idea that it was a substitution existed along side of them in the Patristic period

The only thing I'd add (not that it will make any difference, it seems) is that just because there was not a worked out THEORY of SATISFACTION (as per Anselm) or a developed PENAL substitution theory as the Reformers articulated it, this doesn't meant that the idea of substituion in GENERAL was absent in the first millenium. The fact that several examples are documented in the article cited above refutes your assertion (which was indeed simplistic) that such an absence is an "objective, historical, scholarly fact". Different ideas of the Atonement indeed coexisted in the Fathers (and Scripture for that matter) and aren't necessarily mutually contradictory--in fact, many are complimentary. However, this may fall on deaf ears of those who are more inclined to cherry pick the data to bolster their agendas.

 

[Rebel]

Since you are a former catchumen, I would not presume to disagree with what you were taught.

I would make a couple of observations. First, certainly the Orthodox would not accept penal substitution as being a valid explanation of the atonement.

Second, while some Orthodox may indeed reject the wrath of God (there's a lot of that going around these days, with folks throwing out the baby of substitution with the bathwater of penal satisfacation), some of the disagreement may be on semantics. Certainly the Orthodox fathers had no compunction about upholding the wrath of God; Chrysostom repeatedly mentions the wrath of God and says of Christ that "His advent arrested the wrath of God, and caused us to live by faith."

Yet Chrysostom's view of the wrath of God may not square with that of Western theologians (especially those of the Protestant Magisterium).


First Exhortation to Theodore After His Fall

This is it precisely. The Western view of things theological and spiritual is at variance with the way Eastern Christians view those things. The West is legalistic and sees God's actions as retribution. The East views God's actions as restorative. This has significantly different ways of viewing the atonement and other central Christian doctrines. The Eastern views are the views of the earliest churches, and the Eastern view of the atonement held sway for a thousand years.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Since you are a former catchumen, I would not presume to disagree with what you were taught.

Thanks.

I would make a couple of observations. First, certainly the Orthodox would not accept penal substitution as being a valid explanation of the atonement.

Correct--that was my observation.

Second, while some Orthodox may indeed reject the wrath of God (there's a lot of that going around these days, with folks throwing out the baby of substitution with the bathwater of penal satisfacation), some of the disagreement may be on semantics.

I agree with that, particularly the bolded part.

Certainly the Orthodox fathers had no compunction about upholding the wrath of God; Chrysostom repeatedly mentions the wrath of God and says of Christ that "His advent arrested the wrath of God, and caused us to live by faith."

Correct.

Yet Chrysostom's view of the wrath of God may not square with that of Western theologians (especially those of the Protestant Magisterium).

Perhaps not. My initial point was that the ideas of God's wrath, substitutionary atonment, and imputed righteousness are indeed Scriptural. While some of the specific nuanced expressions of these ideas by the Reformers may have been new (and in some cases even alien to the thought of the fathers), I was more disturbed by the way that these basic Scriptural ideas were downplayed or even denied altogether among the Eastern Orthodox I had read ("throwing the baby out with the bathwater", as you put it).

 

[Doubting Thomas]

This is it precisely. The Western view of things theological and spiritual is at variance with the way Eastern Christians view those things. The West is legalistic and sees God's actions as retribution. The East views God's actions as restorative. This has significantly different ways of viewing the atonement and other central Christian doctrines. The Eastern views are the views of the earliest churches, and the Eastern view of the atonement held sway for a thousand years.

But BOTH of these emphases are found in Scripture. God is our Great Physician AND our Judge. Legal concerns (ie the LAW)and sacrifice run through out scripture. The 'Eastern' view of things is no more valid than the 'Western'--the Church indeed existed in both places before 1054 (and beyond)--and vice versa.

In Christ, we are at once RESTORED to LIFE and DECLARED 'NOT GUILTY'.

 

[Rebel]

Apparently you missed (or ignored) what I posted earlier in this regard, so I'll post it again...



The only thing I'd add (not that it will make any difference, it seems) is that just because there was not a worked out THEORY of SATISFACTION (as per Anselm) or a developed PENAL substitution theory as the Reformers articulated it, this doesn't meant that the idea of substituion in GENERAL was absent in the first millenium. The fact that several examples are documented in the article cited above refutes your assertion (which was indeed simplistic) that such an absence is an "objective, historical, scholarly fact". Different ideas of the Atonement indeed coexisted in the Fathers (and Scripture for that matter) and aren't necessarily mutually contradictory--in fact, many are complimentary. However, this may fall on deaf ears of those who are more inclined to cherry pick the data to bolster their agendas.

And the following article refutes your article. I am trying not to repeat something that may have been said or referenced previously, so I have done searches. I found that this article has been partially referenced here before, but it is so good that I will post a link to the whole article. Please go here and open the .pdf: therebelgod.com/CrossPaper.pdf

The facts are on my side, not yours.

My agenda is the truth. I don't know what yours is.

 

[Rebel]

What lacks honor is pretending to be someone you are not. You are in fact Michael Wrenn.

You know nothing. I will not respond to you further. You can say what you want and even reply to me, but you will be speaking into the air.

 

[gigabyte71]

I have appreciated this thread. I knew nothing about Eastern Orthodoxy and had to do a bit of searching, thankful to the OP for it.