How do you view the Orthodox Church?

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

They have a translation based upon the LXX then? And they seem to equate the Church fathers as almost equal to the scriptures then?

The Orthodox Church is Greek and considers the Septuagint to have been the Bible of the early church. My understanding is that they maintain all OT quotes in the NT are from the Septuagint.

The early church fathers do figure prominently, but I only know a few generalities and bits and pieces about the Orthodox. They are not monolithic but have their differences and divisions.

 

[Yeshua1]

I'm not a high church kinda guy. But all the stuff I've read from EO guys has been amazing.

Really enjoyed this video from Matt.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Even though they teach another Gospel, and add scriptures?

 

[Yeshua1]

The thing is Christians can learn from other Christians (without adopting their doctrines as a whole). It is very easy to see the error in other groups, but it is very difficult to see our own error (or potential for error).

The problem is though when the church being viewed holds to another Gospel!

 

[Yeshua1]

They discovered the gospel that they had lost (the gospel itself was never lost).

That is what people need to realize about the Reformation. There were people outside of the Roman Catholic Church, uninfluenced by Roman Catholic doctrine, who held the gospel of Christ.

The Reformers were still hampered by faulty theology. God used them in a wonderful way, but at the same time they carried with them poor doctrines and traditions.

Yes, as they did not really do a through reformation of Rome, but did get Pauline Justification right!

 

[Yeshua1]

The Orthodox Church is Greek and considers the Septuagint to have been the Bible of the early church. My understanding is that they maintain all OT quotes in the NT are from the Septuagint.

The early church fathers do figure prominently, but I only know a few generalities and bits and pieces about the Orthodox. They are not monolithic but have their differences and divisions.

They do seem though from my readings on them to really hold to a sacramentalism salvation, which goes against Baptist theology of salvation!

 

[JonC]

I'm not a high church kinda guy. But all the stuff I've read from EO guys has been amazing.

Really enjoyed this video from Matt.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

This is a very interesting video. I agree with a lot of what the man says, to include the dependence of mainstream Protestant doctrine on Roman Catholic doctrine.

What I found most interesting was his explanation of icons. He is right, and this does point out why iconoclastic ideology was such a sin (when imposed on churches). It erased truth because that truth was not expressed in a way that a group appreciated. I had never considered exactly why these images were used (both in the early church, the Orthodox church, and Judaism). I also did not know the differences between how the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church used images. Very good video.

 

[JonC]

Yes, as they did not really do a through reformation of Rome, but did get Pauline Justification right!

In your opinion, and from a Reformation perspective, they got Pauline Justification right.

What is important, however, is not how they reformed doctrine in terms of Pauline Justification but how they understood Christ's justification. Here I see them as missing the mark. And they did not form a consensus. Luther did not exactly agree with Calvin on this issue (for example).

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

They do seem though from my readings on them to really hold to a sacramentalism salvation, which goes against Baptist theology of salvation!

That may be so, but my observation is more general. Sometimes people latch onto a system they see as right and are converted to a belief in the rightness of that system rather than to Christ. I don’t believe in Christianity, not even the Baptist versions, rather I believe in “Jesus Christ and him crucified.”

 

[Yeshua1]

In your opinion, and from a Reformation perspective, they got Pauline Justification right.

What is important, however, is not how they reformed doctrine in terms of Pauline Justification but how they understood Christ's justification. Here I see them as missing the mark. And they did not form a consensus. Luther did not exactly agree with Calvin on this issue (for example).

Pauline Justification is Jesus Justification, as the Holy Spirit Himself inspired Paul to write it down for us!

 

[Yeshua1]

That may be so, but my observation is more general. Sometimes people latch onto a system they see as right and are converted to a belief in the rightness of that system rather than to Christ. I don’t believe in Christianity, not even the Baptist versions, rather I believe in “Jesus Christ and him crucified.”

True, but we Baptists have the true Gospel much clearer then the orthodox or catholic church does!

 

[JonC]

True, but we Baptists have the true Gospel much clearer then the orthodox or catholic church does!

It depends on what we mean (or expect) by clear.

This is something I am just considering from watching the video. I did not realize many of the things the Greek Orthodox held in terms of communicating the gospel. There are very good points in the video.

For example, why is it that we believe the gospel is communicated most clearly through intellectualism? Is it because that most represents our worldview? Is explanation greater than example in communication? Is explanation greater than experience?

I do not have the answers, but these are some of the questions that need to be explored before declaring other worldviews inferior.

 

[Yeshua1]

It depends on what we mean (or expect) by clear.

This is something I am just considering from watching the video. I did not realize many of the things the Greek Orthodox held in terms of communicating the gospel. There are very good points in the video.

For example, why is it that we believe the gospel is communicated most clearly through intellectualism? Is it because that most represents our worldview? Is explanation greater than example in communication? Is explanation greater than experience?

I do not have the answers, but these are some of the questions that need to be explored before declaring other worldviews inferior.

Not worldviews, but their NT theology is faulty and defective!

 

[JonC]

Not worldviews, but their NT theology is faulty and defective!

Sure it is. So is Reformed Theology (by definition, as there are competing NT theologies within Reformed Theology).

But that does not mean that the issue cannot be narrowed to worldviews.

 

[1689Dave]

As another Christian church sect, or classified as same as Roman Catholic?

The Church is invisible. Made up exclusively of believers in Christ. The physical institutional organizations we call churches are in fact religious business franchises who cater to believers of a specific bent. Take them away the Church remains.

 

[Yeshua1]

The Church is invisible. Made up exclusively of believers in Christ. The physical institutional organizations we call churches are in fact religious business franchises who cater to believers of a specific bent. Take them away the Church remains.

 

[Yeshua1]

Would you see either of them teaching the true Gospel?

 

[rsr]

I wouldn’t say they are the same, nor would they, but they have many similarities.

I think it's safe to say that their theology, but not ecclesiology, is similar. As noted, the Orthodox do not believe that any bishop has universal jurisdiction over the entire church, as Roman Catholics do. Despite their differences, the Roman church considers Orthodox sacraments valid and recognizes the Orthodox have apostolic succession; the Orthodox, on the other hand, do not view Catholic sacraments as valid.

In a general sense, Orthodox theology is not as rationalistic as Western Christianity, either Roman Catholiciam nor most Protestant sects. You won't find the equivalent of an Aquinas, parsing sentences and slicing definitions, in Orthodoxy. Orthodox believe in transubstantiation, but by and large they simply accept that it is true and don't spend too much effort trying to define exactly how it or when it happens, which is something they don't consider important and that God hasn't told them.

Unlike many Protestants, neither care for the Hebrew OT (Masoretic Text), which does not include the Apocrypha.

The standard Bible of the Greek Orthodox is the LXX (for the Old Testament) and a Byzantine text (for the New Testament). The various ethnic Orthodox churches (Russian, etc.) have liturgies and Bibles in their own languages, which have their own translational histories. (There is no officially sanctioned translation in English, although several Bibles are used. The New King James New Testament is the text found on the American syn) The Orthodox churches have varying lists of deuterocanonical books, in general including more than the Roman church.

 

[Yeshua1]

It depends on what we mean (or expect) by clear.

This is something I am just considering from watching the video. I did not realize many of the things the Greek Orthodox held in terms of communicating the gospel. There are very good points in the video.

For example, why is it that we believe the gospel is communicated most clearly through intellectualism? Is it because that most represents our worldview? Is explanation greater than example in communication? Is explanation greater than experience?

I do not have the answers, but these are some of the questions that need to be explored before declaring other worldviews inferior.

Not their worldview, but their actual theology is in question !

 

[JonC]

Not their worldview, but their actual theology is in question !

Worldviews affect theology. Always.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Worldviews affect theology. Always.

Many factors interactively affect one’s worldview and theology, often subconsciously, e.g., language, culture, education, gender, age, personality, life experience, etc.