Russ, others may disagree..but it is semantics, IMHO, when saying that claiming others worship the same is not the same as saying they worship the same God. On many things, they are EXACTLY the same--but only Christianity has the most accurate view when it comes to all points with those within Islam having an inaccurate viewpoint on other things that is fulfilled in Christ. That's something other Orthodox have noted, inlcuding St.John of Damascus..and I'll go with that if I'm going to be honest with the information.
As it concerns Orthodoxy, in general, the theme that I agree with is what numerous other Orthoodox have noted when saying that they may not know where else the Lord is--but they know where He is at....specically meaning that not all truth is found solely within Orthodoxy since the Lord has worked in multiple camps throughout the existence of the church. And I agree with those Orthodox who note the early church in Orthodoxy must be considered and yet it is also to be remembered that the church itself was in a state of change at many points. Bradley Nassif has noted this among other Orthodox Bishops and branches--and it is where I stand.
Who said that I was a Messianic Jew? At any point? WHat was noted, to my knowledge (
here, #
1, #
21 , #
35, #
98 ) was that I go to a Messianic Jewish fellowship within the Eastern Christian tradition (in light of how leadership was involved in Eastern Orthodoxy within the Monastic monk style) and that I live life with Jews, be it Messianic Jews or Byzantine Jews (i.e. Eastern Catholics) or Hebrew Catholics. As
a Messianic Gentile. Working with Orthodox believers, paticularly in Coptic Orthodoxy, it is not a problem with connection being present--and I was just ordained within the Eastern church not too long ago by one who was an ordained priest within it.
As there are numerous others within Orthodoxy who've been about reconciliation/noted it on the simple basis of having accuracy, accepting Orthodoxy isn't really the focus (IMHO).
And with that said, who said that I did not accept Orthodoxy? As in I didn't agree with it or reject it? Again, there is a reality that people are connected with Orthodoxy and yet working in other groups. Not going to debate the matter extensively here in light of how other Orthodox have brought it up before already, as it concerns ecumenical work with groups outside of Orthodoxy/presenting properly to groups that do not like Orthodoxy. Be it with Eastern Orthodox like Bradley Nassif, Thomas Oden or G.K Chesteron or C.S Lewis---often brought up/referenced frequently here (by others as well as yourself...#
19 , #
78 ,
here,
here,
here,
here, etc ) as if he's Orthodox when he never claimed to be and was a Devout Anglican who appreciated differing traditions in the faith---and many others, there's the reality of working with others in a myriad of camps. Orthodoxy is affirmed and it has nothing to do with those not within it since even others in Orthodoxy do the same when it comes to noting where the Lord works and affirming that.
IMHO, that statement would need to be renconciled with what other Orthodox here in TAW have noted before in numerous discussions in saying things they learn/share from other traditions....not counter to the early church they support but in addition to it. The fact that C.S Lewis and GK Chesteron--both outside of Orthodoxy and within differing traditions--are referenced frequently others and pointed to in order to support points by others in Orthodoxy seems to display the thought that one can say there's nothing needed from other "traditions" (if others say Orthodoxy can learn from those outside of it) but then use those traditions to support Orthodoxy when it may suit the times. In accepting others outside of the faith/referencing them, the explicit message is that others inherently believe that others in differing traditions meet a need within Orthodox worlds....
What I've seen in other Orthodox is that they accept the Church/appreciate it, but never do they say that truth is ONLY found there. Others differ, of course....and the differences come out in discussion all of the time when there are mini Orthodox skirmishes on what is "Orthodox" (one of them being on politics/the best kind of government, another one of them being what the church fathers say on the subject of evolution, another being what the early church felt on sexual relations...with other Orthodox having immense disagreements on what level the Fathers should have been accepted in views that went counter to the adominitons of the Word---or corrections given when Orthodox may give commentary about movements on groups OUTSIDE of orthodoxy that are nowhere close to representing what those groups even believe. That has happened often whenever there has been discussion and others had to address things akin to false scenarios or heresay when claiming what a Protestant (or Catholic ) group was doing and assumed that simply because an Orthodox person was saying it/was in agreement with the early Church means that all things stated were correct. Sister MJK has shared on that often, as seen in #
29 and #
34.
Indeed.
Not certain as to why this is brought up, but cool
Goes right back into the debate on things like evolution and the debates that have happened where the Church changed...and things utilized within Orthodoxy that the church didn't have, from technology to media and environmentalism a host of other things (within the past 5 decades alone)--factors that many in Orthodoxy noted were traits they saw outside of it/began to follow suit when it hit the shores of orthodoxy
And others used them to clarify.