Yeah I know that. But that doesn't answer my question.

I've given this analogy before, so apologies if you have already heard it.

If I say, "Fish swim in the sea." and later learn that whales are in fact not fish but mammals- does that mean that my previous understanding was wrong or "inferior" to quote you? No. It just means that now I understand that fish and mammals swim in sea.

You're the one that used the words diminished and better. You just seem uncomfortable with the logical conclusions to what you're saying.

Dermdoc, thanks for posting this very interesting article.

What is your interpretation of the great white throne judgment as described in Rev 20:11-15 as it relates to heaven or hell being a state of mind? This scripture seems to indicate that God is taking an action.

Aggies76 said:

---

Dermdoc, thanks for posting this very interesting article.

What is your interpretation of the great white throne judgment as described in Rev 20:11-15 as it relates to heaven or hell being a state of mind? This scripture seems to indicate that God is taking an action.

---

Depends on how you interpret it. Is it a literal white throne and lake of fire? And what does fire mean in Biblical terms?

Is it a purification process or punitive punishment?

I personally think this Scripture is allegorical and should not be taken literally.

And I believe that people are "judged" by being exposed to God's presence.

God can not sin and is just.

All that being said, Revelation has been translated so many different ways by so many people smarter than me, who knows?

I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one.

dermdoc said:

---

Aggies76 said:

---

Dermdoc, thanks for posting this very interesting article.

What is your interpretation of the great white throne judgment as described in Rev 20:11-15 as it relates to heaven or hell being a state of mind? This scripture seems to indicate that God is taking an action.

---

Depends on how you interpret it. Is it a literal white throne and lake of fire? And what does fire mean in Biblical terms?

Is it a purification process or punitive punishment?

I personally think this Scripture is allegorical and should not be taken literally.

And I believe that people are "judged" by being exposed to God's presence.

God can not sin and is just.

All that being said, Revelation has been translated so many different ways by so many people smarter than me, who knows?

I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one.

---

Derm, love reading this from you:

"I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one."


Curious how you think this squares with salvation by faith alone? It seems Luther, Calvin et al stood for the proposition that it was forensic, declaratory in nature and not an actual transformation. Apologies if I have misunderstood.

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Aggies76 said:

---

Dermdoc, thanks for posting this very interesting article.

What is your interpretation of the great white throne judgment as described in Rev 20:11-15 as it relates to heaven or hell being a state of mind? This scripture seems to indicate that God is taking an action.

---

Depends on how you interpret it. Is it a literal white throne and lake of fire? And what does fire mean in Biblical terms?

Is it a purification process or punitive punishment?

I personally think this Scripture is allegorical and should not be taken literally.

And I believe that people are "judged" by being exposed to God's presence.

God can not sin and is just.

All that being said, Revelation has been translated so many different ways by so many people smarter than me, who knows?

I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one.

---

Derm, love reading this from you:

"I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one."


Curious how you think this squares with salvation by faith alone? It seems Luther, Calvin et al stood for the proposition that it was forensic, declaratory in nature and not an actual transformation. Apologies if I have misunderstood.

---

I think the Western church and especially America, doubled down on justification and being "saved" rather than the process of becoming more Christ like through theosis/sanctification and glorification when we die and are in the presence of the Lord.

"Sinners in the hands of an angry God" and "turn or burn" theology.

What are we being "saved" from? God is good. We are essentially being saved from our sin nature so we can become more Christ like and produce fruit. And be filled with joy and abundance of life.

Or you can reject God's grace and eventually creat your own "hell" with the complete absence of God or good.

dermdoc said:

---

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Aggies76 said:

---

Dermdoc, thanks for posting this very interesting article.

What is your interpretation of the great white throne judgment as described in Rev 20:11-15 as it relates to heaven or hell being a state of mind? This scripture seems to indicate that God is taking an action.

---

Depends on how you interpret it. Is it a literal white throne and lake of fire? And what does fire mean in Biblical terms?

Is it a purification process or punitive punishment?

I personally think this Scripture is allegorical and should not be taken literally.

And I believe that people are "judged" by being exposed to God's presence.

God can not sin and is just.

All that being said, Revelation has been translated so many different ways by so many people smarter than me, who knows?

I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one.

---

Derm, love reading this from you:

"I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one."


Curious how you think this squares with salvation by faith alone? It seems Luther, Calvin et al stood for the proposition that it was forensic, declaratory in nature and not an actual transformation. Apologies if I have misunderstood.

---

I think the Western church and especially America, doubled down on justification and being "saved" rather than the process of becoming more Christ like through theosis/sanctification and glorification when we die and are in the presence of the Lord.

"Sinners in the hands of an angry God" and "turn or burn" theology.

What are we being "saved" from? God is good. We are essentially being saved from our sin nature so we can become more Christ like and produce fruit. And be filled with joy and abundance of life.

Or you can reject God's grace and eventually creat your own "hell" with the complete absence of God or good.

---

I think you are correct. We are saved from the effects of sin but more importantly we are saved for union with our creator, which is why we were created in the first place.

I just don't see how that can be squared with the soteriology of faith alone as understood by the original reformers.

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Aggies76 said:

---

Dermdoc, thanks for posting this very interesting article.

What is your interpretation of the great white throne judgment as described in Rev 20:11-15 as it relates to heaven or hell being a state of mind? This scripture seems to indicate that God is taking an action.

---

Depends on how you interpret it. Is it a literal white throne and lake of fire? And what does fire mean in Biblical terms?

Is it a purification process or punitive punishment?

I personally think this Scripture is allegorical and should not be taken literally.

And I believe that people are "judged" by being exposed to God's presence.

God can not sin and is just.

All that being said, Revelation has been translated so many different ways by so many people smarter than me, who knows?

I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one.

---

Derm, love reading this from you:

"I do believe salvation is an ontological event and not a judicial one."


Curious how you think this squares with salvation by faith alone? It seems Luther, Calvin et al stood for the proposition that it was forensic, declaratory in nature and not an actual transformation. Apologies if I have misunderstood.

---

I think the Western church and especially America, doubled down on justification and being "saved" rather than the process of becoming more Christ like through theosis/sanctification and glorification when we die and are in the presence of the Lord.

"Sinners in the hands of an angry God" and "turn or burn" theology.

What are we being "saved" from? God is good. We are essentially being saved from our sin nature so we can become more Christ like and produce fruit. And be filled with joy and abundance of life.

Or you can reject God's grace and eventually creat your own "hell" with the complete absence of God or good.

---

I think you are correct. We are saved from the effects of sin but more importantly we are saved for union with our creator, which is why we were created in the first place.

I just don't see how that can be squared with the soteriology of faith alone as understood by the original reformers.

---

I think faith is the starting point for a lifelong journey and process.

" What are we being "saved" from? God is good."

This is a wonderful insight that I feel reflects a level of spiritual knowledge that Christ was trying to relate in his ministry. Not that the rituals are unimportant, because they are a way to engage man at a physical level (bread and wine for example) that reinforce a metaphysical reality.

However, to get so caught up with rituals and lose sight of your brother/sister in need is what I feel Christ came to clear up.

The same can be said for the mission. As you said, God is "good". The more we conform our will and fallen nature to God's plan for us- the more we can reflect God's plan for all of mankind. We don't lose anything in doing this, rather we become more like he envisioned us to be.

We are being saved from our fallen nature.

Derm, you won't like this, but Sproul's answer of what we need saving from is God's wrath.

We need a savior because it helps us shed our sinful nature? That doesn't really compute for me. We need a savior so we don't endure God's wrath.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Derm, you won't like this, but Sproul's answer of what we need saving from is God's wrath.

We need a savior because it helps us shed our sinful nature? That doesn't really compute for me. We need a savior so we don't endure God's wrath.

---

Depends on how you define God's "wrath". God is immutable, without change. He is love, just, and wants to save all people as defined by Scripture.

I believe "wrath" is simply God's burning love on people who reject Him. Like it says in the op. Kind of like kindness to enemies heaps burning coals on their heads. Or why Jesus instructed us to love our enemies. Evil does not like love or good, so it is like "hell" for them.

So what are we to do with the "weeping and gnashing of teeth" references?

10andBOUNCE said:

---

So what are we to do with the "weeping and gnashing of teeth" references?

---

They reject God and that is the result. And extreme remorse. Self induced not God induced.

The Reformed/Calvinist soteriology comprises a fairly small fraction of soteriology beliefs in Christianity.

And if you read the original link that was the guy's point. The Reformed/Calvinist soteriology is so different from the rest of Christianity that it is like a different Gospel and belief system.

Good article on God's "wrath"

https://www.pravmir.com/the-wrath-of-god-according-to-st-john-chrysostom/

Thanks for sharing. If I understand correctly this is pointing to the idea that God's wrath is equivalent to his discipline? I know the article is about Chrysostom's view, but I have a hard time with there being zero scriptural references.

Quote:

---

Therefore, because of God's love for us, He allows us to be afflicted.

---

Agree, but the "us" here is not all of mankind, but it has to be believers. I agree with the idea our suffering absolutely plays a vital role in our ultimate repentance.

Chrysostom says:

Quote:

---

even if He punishes, even if He takes vengeance, He does this not with wrath, but with tender care

---

I would need to better understand his full analysis versus just a snippet taken from something he said or wrote.

Romans 12:18-19

[18] If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. [19] Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."

Hebrews 10:26-31

[26] For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, [27] but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. [28] Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. [29] How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? [30] For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." [31] It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Deuteronomy 32:31-36

[31] For their rock is not as our Rock;
our enemies are by themselves.
[32] For their vine comes from the vine of Sodom
and from the fields of Gomorrah;
their grapes are grapes of poison;
their clusters are bitter;
[33] their wine is the poison of serpents
and the cruel venom of asps.

[34] "'Is not this laid up in store with me,
sealed up in my treasuries?
[35] Vengeance is mine, and recompense,
for the time when their foot shall slip;
for the day of their calamity is at hand,
and their doom comes swiftly.'
[36] For the LORD will vindicate his people
and have compassion on his servants,
when he sees that their power is gone
and there is none remaining, bond or free.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Thanks for sharing. If I understand correctly this is pointing to the idea that God's wrath is equivalent to his discipline? I know the article is about Chrysostom's view, but I have a hard time with there being zero scriptural references.

Quote:

---

Therefore, because of God's love for us, He allows us to be afflicted.

---

Agree, but the "us" here is not all of mankind, but it has to be believers. I agree with the idea our suffering absolutely plays a vital role in our ultimate repentance.

Chrysostom says:

Quote:

---

even if He punishes, even if He takes vengeance, He does this not with wrath, but with tender care

---

I would need to better understand his full analysis versus just a snippet taken from something he said or wrote.

Romans 12:18-19

[18] If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. [19] Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."

Hebrews 10:26-31

[26] For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, [27] but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. [28] Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. [29] How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? [30] For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." [31] It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Deuteronomy 32:31-36

[31] For their rock is not as our Rock;
our enemies are by themselves.
[32] For their vine comes from the vine of Sodom
and from the fields of Gomorrah;
their grapes are grapes of poison;
their clusters are bitter;
[33] their wine is the poison of serpents
and the cruel venom of asps.

[34] "'Is not this laid up in store with me,
sealed up in my treasuries?
[35] Vengeance is mine, and recompense,
for the time when their foot shall slip;
for the day of their calamity is at hand,
and their doom comes swiftly.'
[36] For the LORD will vindicate his people
and have compassion on his servants,
when he sees that their power is gone
and there is none remaining, bond or free.

---

And I can come back with Scripture that God is love, full of mercy, desires all men to be saved, Jesus's birth is for ALL men, and instructs to love our enemies.

It all comes down to what our perception of God is. And how we perceive His character through Scripture and church tradition.

You and I have totally different views of the true character of God. And that is why I think Calvinism is wrong. Scripture is cherry picked without looking at the totality of Scripture. Every Scripture must fit the Calvinist theology even the necessity of adding words (weird for Sola Scriptura).

Totally different from the Early church and actually all of Christendom except for a relatively small minority.

Highly suggest this book

Quote:

---

And I can come back with Scripture that God is love

---

Love by who's definition? For example, our human definition of love has no way of reconciling certain things that God instructs in the Old Testament. So either God is mutable from Old to New Testaments, or we have to come to grips that the love of God that we speak of is something we cannot fully comprehend and is not what we think it is.

Deuteronomy 20:12-18
12 But if it makes no peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it. 13 And when the Lord your God gives it into your hand, you shall put all its males to the sword, 14 but the women and the little ones, the livestock, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as plunder for yourselves. And you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the Lord your God has given you. 15 Thus you shall do to all the cities that are very far from you, which are not cities of the nations here. 16 But in the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes, 17 but you shall devote them to complete destruction,[a] the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded, 18 that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Quote:

---

And I can come back with Scripture that God is love

---

Love by who's definition? For example, our human definition of love has no way of reconciling certain things that God instructs in the Old Testament. So either God is mutable from Old to New Testaments, or we have to come to grips that the love of God that we speak of is something we cannot fully comprehend and is not what we think it is.

Deuteronomy 20:12-18
12 But if it makes no peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it. 13 And when the Lord your God gives it into your hand, you shall put all its males to the sword, 14 but the women and the little ones, the livestock, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as plunder for yourselves. And you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the Lord your God has given you. 15 Thus you shall do to all the cities that are very far from you, which are not cities of the nations here. 16 But in the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes, 17 but you shall devote them to complete destruction,[a] the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded, 18 that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God.

---

We are under a new covenant. How many times do I have to post this? That is what Jesus is all about. A covenant of grace, not law. God never changes but His relationship with us does.

It is fascinating how I have such a different concept of God's wrath than you and you have such a different concept than me on God's love.

Strongly recommend MacDonald's book. It is all about the character of God.

And I still pray daily for you and your pastor who had the problem. How is that going?

Quote:

---

We are under a new covenant. How many times do I have to post this?

---

If God is immutable, his character, attributes, etc have not changed, ever. What implications are you saying the New Covenant has in regards to God's love and his character? He has made a new way for us to commune with him in Christ. Is his love more robust in the era of the New Covenant?

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Quote:

---

We are under a new covenant. How many times do I have to post this?

---

If God is immutable, his character, attributes, etc have not changed, ever. What implications are you saying the New Covenant has in regards to God's love and his character? He has made a new way for us to commune with him in Christ. Is his love more robust in the era of the New Covenant?

---

No. He never changed. He showed love back then also. But with Christ, we have a new covenant of grace.

Do you believe Christ is the revelation of God to humans? Incarnate God in human form?

Where did Jesus ever harm anyone? Where did He instruct His followers to kill people? All He did was heal.

What are the fruits of the spirit? Is wrath one? And isn't the Holy Spirit a manifestation of God embedded in us?

And are we instructed to pattern our life after Christ or the God of the old covenant in the OT?

A W Tozer famously said that how a man perceives God and His character basically determines the character of the man.

Wise man.

Quote:

---

No. He never changed. He showed love back then also. But with Christ, we have a new covenant of grace.

---

Another topic you may need to realize about reformed theology is that the covenant of grace is considered in effect at the moment after Adam failed to uphold the covenant of works. A redeemer is promised in Genesis 3:15 with the first reference to the gospel (the so-called proto-evangelium).

Quote:

---

Although the covenant of grace unfolds in several historical steps(i.e., the promise God made to Abraham in Genesis 12, 17, etc., the promises God made to Israel at Mount Sinai in Exodus 24, as well as on the plains of Moab in Deuteronomy 29:13, the promise of an eternal kingdom made to David in 2 Samuel 7:14, followed by the prophecy of a New Covenant made to Jeremiah in his prophecy [31:33], which the author of Hebrews specifically applies to Jesus Christ, the covenant mediator in Hebrews 8:1-13)the covenant is essentially the same throughout the entire course of redemptive history. This can be seen in the simple fact that there is but one gospel in both testaments, just as there is only one covenant mediator (Jesus Christ).

---

https://www.wscal.edu/basics-of-the-reformed-faith-the-covenant-of-grace/#:~:text=Immediately%20after%20the%20fall%20of,%2Dcalled%20proto%2Devangelium).

Quote:

---

And are we instructed to pattern our life after Christ or the God of the old covenant in the OT?

---

This is a dangerous question for a multitude of reasons.

chuckd said:

---

Quote:

---

And are we instructed to pattern our life after Christ or the God of the old covenant in the OT?

---

This is a dangerous question for a multitude of reasons.

---

How so? God's character is immutable and revealed to us in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ.

We are under a new covenant.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Quote:

---

No. He never changed. He showed love back then also. But with Christ, we have a new covenant of grace.

---

Another topic you may need to realize about reformed theology is that the covenant of grace is considered in effect at the moment after Adam failed to uphold the covenant of works. A redeemer is promised in Genesis 3:15 with the first reference to the gospel (the so-called proto-evangelium).

Quote:

---

Although the covenant of grace unfolds in several historical steps(i.e., the promise God made to Abraham in Genesis 12, 17, etc., the promises God made to Israel at Mount Sinai in Exodus 24, as well as on the plains of Moab in Deuteronomy 29:13, the promise of an eternal kingdom made to David in 2 Samuel 7:14, followed by the prophecy of a New Covenant made to Jeremiah in his prophecy [31:33], which the author of Hebrews specifically applies to Jesus Christ, the covenant mediator in Hebrews 8:1-13)the covenant is essentially the same throughout the entire course of redemptive history. This can be seen in the simple fact that there is but one gospel in both testaments, just as there is only one covenant mediator (Jesus Christ).

---

https://www.wscal.edu/basics-of-the-reformed-faith-the-covenant-of-grace/#:~:text=Immediately%20after%20the%20fall%20of,%2Dcalled%20proto%2Devangelium).

---

Do not agree with this. But at least I read it.

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Quote:

---

No. He never changed. He showed love back then also. But with Christ, we have a new covenant of grace.

---

Another topic you may need to realize about reformed theology is that the covenant of grace is considered in effect at the moment after Adam failed to uphold the covenant of works. A redeemer is promised in Genesis 3:15 with the first reference to the gospel (the so-called proto-evangelium).

Quote:

---

Although the covenant of grace unfolds in several historical steps(i.e., the promise God made to Abraham in Genesis 12, 17, etc., the promises God made to Israel at Mount Sinai in Exodus 24, as well as on the plains of Moab in Deuteronomy 29:13, the promise of an eternal kingdom made to David in 2 Samuel 7:14, followed by the prophecy of a New Covenant made to Jeremiah in his prophecy [31:33], which the author of Hebrews specifically applies to Jesus Christ, the covenant mediator in Hebrews 8:1-13)the covenant is essentially the same throughout the entire course of redemptive history. This can be seen in the simple fact that there is but one gospel in both testaments, just as there is only one covenant mediator (Jesus Christ).

---

https://www.wscal.edu/basics-of-the-reformed-faith-the-covenant-of-grace/#:~:text=Immediately%20after%20the%20fall%20of,%2Dcalled%20proto%2Devangelium).

---

Do not agree with this. But at least I read it.

---

He really lost me when he stated that God's grace extended only to the elect which I think is not compatible with the totality of Scripture.

And why did it not bother you with this article that there was little direct Scripture quotations like it always does when I post a link?

Almost like a selection bias.

I counted roughly 15 references to scripture in that brief link I provided.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I counted roughly 15 references to scripture in that brief link I provided.

---

All of my sources reference Scripture also. It is just Scripture that fits Reformed theology that you approve. From your past posts, I figured you meant actual quoted Scripture. Like you do a lot. As do I.

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I counted roughly 15 references to scripture in that brief link I provided.

---

All of my sources reference Scripture also. It is just Scripture that fits Reformed theology. From your past posts, I figured you meant actual quoted Scripture. Like you do a lot. As do I.

---

If only we had an infallible authority edtablished by Jesus to decide what scripture means when we find ourselves at loggerheads on how to interpet scripture…

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I counted roughly 15 references to scripture in that brief link I provided.

---

All of my sources reference Scripture also. It is just Scripture that fits Reformed theology. From your past posts, I figured you meant actual quoted Scripture. Like you do a lot. As do I.

---

If only we had an infallible authority edtablished by Jesus to decide what scripture means when we find ourselves at loggerheads on how to interpet scripture…

---

I would honestly love a straight forward, Biblically based exposition on some of the Catholic and Orthodox doctrines. Does that exist?

dermdoc said:

---

And I still pray daily for you and your pastor who had the problem. How is that going?

---

https://baptistnews.com/article/steve-lawson-preached-fire-and-brimstone-except-for-himself/

Is this the guy? Wow. He really needs prayer for a lot of stuff not just the accusations. And how can you preach this stuff and do what he did? Does he not realize that he could be talking about himself in hell? I guess he figures he is one of the "elect" and is saved no matter what.

Where was that type of preaching ever used in the New Testament? It is not found in Acts. Paul and Peter never preached like this. Who does this guy think he is? Where are the fruits of the spirit?

"This may shock you, but God will be in hell, and he will be the one inflicting the wrath".

So in his Calvinist double predestination theology, God not only creates people doomed to eternal torment but also administers the punishment Himself.

Please explore Orthodox/Catholic theology. This is Satanic.

And even though it seems this guy has done some bad things, I do not wish his version of hell on anyone. Even him.

I forgive him for whatever he did, wonder if he would forgive me if I did the same?

Zobel said:

---

You're the one that used the words diminished and better. You just seem uncomfortable with the logical conclusions to what you're saying.

---

Well hopefully that's cleared up.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

I counted roughly 15 references to scripture in that brief link I provided.

---

All of my sources reference Scripture also. It is just Scripture that fits Reformed theology. From your past posts, I figured you meant actual quoted Scripture. Like you do a lot. As do I.

---

If only we had an infallible authority edtablished by Jesus to decide what scripture means when we find ourselves at loggerheads on how to interpet scripture…

---

I would honestly love a straight forward, Biblically based exposition on some of the Catholic and Orthodox doctrines. Does that exist?

---

IDK about Orthodoxy, but the most readible, accessible treatise on this from a Catholic perspective is probably the Catechism.