Quote:

---

' God is not a nature , ' he wrote , ' for He is above all nature ; He is not a being , for He is above all beings No single thing of all that is created has or ever will have even the slightest communion with the supreme nature or nearness to it . ' But however remote from us in His essence , yet in His energies God has revealed Himself to us . These energies are not something that exists apart from God , not a gift which God confers upon humans ; they are God Himself in His action and revelation to the world . God exists complete and entire in each of His divine energies . The world , as Gerard Manley Hopkins said , is charged with the grandeur of God ; all creation is a gigantic Burning Bush , permeated but not consumed by the ineffable and wondrous fire of God's energies."

---

Quote:

---

This mystical tradition is marked, particularly in the case of Clement and Gregory, by a strong use of the apophatic approach, whereby God is described in negative rather than positive terms. Since God cannot be properly comprehended by the human mind, all language that is applied to Him is inevitably inexact. It is therefore less misleading to use negative language about God rather than positive to refuse to say what God is, and to state simply what He is not...

The apophatic language of Dionysius was repeated by many others. 'God is infinite and incomprehensible,' wrote John of Damascus, 'and all that is comprehensible about Him is His infinity and incomprehensibility God does not belong to the class of existing things: not that He has no existence, but that He is above all existing things, nay even above existence itself.'*

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Little different when stuff is common knowledge. You can google. If I quote someone, I'll cite them. I'm quoting stuff that's not from one person but common knowledge.

Plus I'm not sure who made you the religion board rule maker lol

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

- Beliefs Eastern Orthodox Christians (EOC) Hold in Contrast to the Augustinian/Reformed Tradition
St Augustine was an Orthodox Christian and a Latin Father.

- EOC reject the Biblical teaching of the natural man's bondage to a corruption of nature, embrace free will and reject the Doctrines of Grace.
We affirm the grievous effects of the Fall and confess that salvation only comes due to God's Grace. This does not preclude free will in any way.

- EOC reject the Biblical doctrine of predestination. But like Arminians believe that when the Bible speaks of Predestination, it speaks of divine foreknowledge of the sinner's choice.
It is more complicated than that. God foreknows all things, including our choices and the consequences of our choices. But this does not preclude our choice from being real and consequential.

- With regard to their soteriology, EOC, like Arminians, are synergistic in their view of regeneration. In other words, they embrace the teaching that man and God cooperate to bring about the new birth.
No. Man does not cooperate to bring about rebirth, as sanctification and illumination are solely gifts of faith in God. However, salvation does not end with new birth in baptism.

- EOC reject the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone. Rather, "theosis" (becoming God) or the progressive transformation of people into full likeness to God, in soul and body, takes prominence. Regeneration & sanctification is viewed as a part of justification.
Justification by grace alone through faith alone is not scriptural. We don't view regeneration, sanctification as part of justification. This is just factually incorrect.

- EOC reject the biblical idea (Romans 5) of inherited (imputed) guilt; They believe, rather, that we are guilty only for our own sins rather as a result of the consequences of Adam's fall.
Yep. But all man inherit the consequences of sin, i.e., death. This is perfectly scriptural. Romans 5:12 says sin and death entered through one man, but it says nothing about guilt.

- EOC unapologeticly hold that they are the one true church of Christ on earth, which alone has guarded right belief and true worship in absolute identity and unbroken succession with the apostolic church. In other words, Evangelicals have lapsed from the true faith into error, if not outright heresy, according to Orthodox believers. The salvation of non-Orthodox is, therefore, in question.
Yep. The last sentence is on shaky ground, meaning, God is merciful and sovereign, so there is no benefit in questioning others salvation. But yes, we actually believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.

- EOC hold to baptismal regeneration - no one can be saved unless he is baptized with water.
We hold to baptismal regeneration because it is scriptural. The latter part is not correct, as we, for example, commemorate St Dismas (the penitent thief) and affirm that those who die as catechumen or martyrs are saved. God is merciful and judges the heart, including intent.

- EOC reject Sola Scriptura. Orthodoxy affirms a single source of revelation, holy tradition, of which Scripture is the preeminent among several forms. The other forms of tradition include the first seven
ecumenical councils, patristic writings, especially those of the first four centuries; later councils; icons; the Liturgy; and canon law. The Protestant view which raises Scripture above tradition as final authority in matters of doctrine is considered by Orthodox as the sin of the Reformation.
Yes, as sola scriptura is not in any way scriptural. The single source of revelation is God, through the Holy Spirit, who leads the church through this day. There is no conflict between scripture and tradition; they are one and the same.

- EOC teach that there are seven sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Confession, Ordination, Marriage, and Holy Unction
No. We affirm that these are Holy Mysteries (sacraments is the latin term, properly) but do not place a limit on the number of Holy Mysteries. Any way that grace is participated in is a Mystery.

- Like Romans Catholics, EOC believe the Eucharist is a true, propitiatory sacrifice.
What? No. Christ's sacrifice on the cross was the propitiatory sacrifice. The Eucharist is a mercy of peace and a sacrifice of praise, and mystically participates in the body of Christ which is the true lamb. The sacrifice itself has nothing to do with propitiation of sins. Consumption of the Eucharist is salvific and for the remission of sins.

- Veneration given to icons. For EOC, icons have always been a part of church tradition so this tradition is considered on par with Scripture. In other words, we can only conclude that Eastern Orthodoxy is an inconsistent, unbiblical substitute for a Christ-centered Biblical Christianity.
What? No. Tradition is not "on par" with scripture, whatever that means. Icons are as old and older than the Church. The Jewish temple had iconography, ancient synagogues had icons, ancient churches have icons. Any veneration given to an icon is given to the prototype.

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Scripture is part of tradition, and tradition reflects all that scripture is.

You can't separate them, each of them apart from the other are meaningless.

Without tradition scripture becomes a fallible collection of allegedly infallible books.

It is a fact that no church Father or early church canon list matched the modern day Protestant canon exactly. But please, don't derail this thread. If you want to talk about the canon start a new OP and we can.

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Scripture is part of tradition, and tradition reflects all that scripture is.

You can't separate them, each of them apart from the other are meaningless.

Without tradition scripture becomes a fallible collection of allegedly infallible books.

It is a fact that no church Father or early church canon list matched the modern day Protestant canon exactly. But please, don't derail this thread. If you want to talk about the canon start a new OP and we can.

---

Tradition grew out of the text right? So it would precede tradition right?

Is there a record that what Paul and the early Christians did, reflects what the orthodoxy does now in their sermons and practices?

---

dermdoc said:

---

Everything on that list is okay. Except wine.

---

Quote:

---

An extremely concise entry-level introduction to the ancient mystical spirituality of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, rooted in the Scriptures and the oral teachings and practices passed down from the Holy Apostles of Christ. The Philokalia is a highly-influential anthology of key texts of 30 Holy Fathers and Mothers of the Orthodox Church from the 4th to the 15th centuries, compliled by two saints and published in Athens in 1777. Only four of the five volumes of the massive Greek original have yet been published in English. Many of these texts originated as talks prepared by abbots of monasteries for an audience of seasoned monks who were quite advanced in the ascetic life, though some texts are suitable for beginners. Thus the average modern reader needs a guide like this book to point out the basics, lest the beginner attempt to comprehend and put into practice passages for which he or she is not ready, leading to discouragement and even spiritual harm. This book focuses on twenty basic themes from the Philokalia, such as watchfulness (nepsis), thoughts (logismoi), spiritual discipline (ascesis), the heart, the intellect (nous), inner stillness (hesychia), the passions, deification (theosis), discernment (diakrisis), spiritual synergy, and of course, the Jesus Prayer. The author, Fr. Anthony Coniaris, is a priest of Greek Orthodox Archiocese of America, and the author of many books for lay people. Those desiring (and ready for) a much lengthier and deeper approach to the Philokalia should consult his earlier book, Philokalia: The Bible of Orthodox Spirituality.

---