Romans 4 and Eastern Orthodox soteriology

[abacabb3]

@abaccabb3. I personally temper my understanding of scripture with the knowledge that its writers and editors were much more limited in their understanding of many objective realities than we ourselves are today, and that they were addressing a specific audience at the time of writing and editing and had what they thought was an important agenda and critical social problems/threats to address. I don't hold it to be an infallible and flawless source of truth because it was written and edited by fallible men and is read and interpreted by the same. But even so, my interpretation of Revelation 3:20 neither contradicts other scripture when correctly interpreted, nor does it contradict simple reason.

If Scripture is not the sole authority, then we can only be our own authorities, which means there is nothing the two of us can discuss. But, then you concede, your soteriology is unbiblical.

If God hardens someone's heart to commit evil against someone, does this mean that this one is not responsible for the evil committed by him or her, so that they will not ultimately be held accountable for evil that they knowingly perpetrated?

No, God is not responsible. The men who executed Jesus were "wicked," even though God preordained the event. Men are in effect the secondary cause and carry the weight of responsibility.

 

[abacabb3]

so He moves to save the most that He can without violating our will.

God is not impotent, He is not merely doing the "best He can."

unless they don't want to do good works. someone can have faith in God and want nothing to do with Him.

St. James says that faith without works is counterfeit.

well, it's in the Gospels when Christ laments for Jerusalem, so yeah it's there.

I believe you are misapplying things.

because God is outside of time. He saw Jacob and Esau and knew their hearts. so He knew who to call, and who not to call.

No, that's not how it works. God literally changed Nebuchadnezzar's will in Daniel 4! Free will was violated and God reserves the right to violate it when He sees fit.

then you need to read the Philokalia a little closer, especially St Maximos the Confessor. it's not Biblically consistant to how you see it that is true, many Protestants say that about us.

One person here already conceded He does not believe the Scripture is the final authority on these matters. Do you care to join him or am I correct in saying the Bible is the final authority and perhaps incorrect in how I apply it?

 

[Shieldmaiden4Christ]

One person here already conceded He does not believe the Scripture is the final authority on these matters. Do you care to join him or am I correct in saying the Bible is the final authority and perhaps incorrect in how I apply it?

I think that God is the final authority on these matters. The Holy Spirit guides His Church.

 

[ArmyMatt]

God is not impotent, He is not merely doing the "best He can."

never said He was

St. James says that faith without works is counterfeit.

He also says the demons believe and tremble, so it is possible to have faith without works

I believe you are misapplying things.

I have no doubt you do

No, that's not how it works. God literally changed Nebuchadnezzar's will in Daniel 4! Free will was violated and God reserves the right to violate it when He sees fit.

nowhere in Daniel 4 does it actually say that God overturned Nebuchadnezzar's will.

One person here already conceded He does not believe the Scripture is the final authority on these matters. Do you care to join him or am I correct in saying the Bible is the final authority and perhaps incorrect in how I apply it?

well, it's the consensus from the beginning that is the final authority, of which the most important aspect is the Bible. but not in the way you understand it. seeing as how it took a generation after the ascension for the Apostles to start writing, and 400 years for the NT to be codified into that canon that we know, it is not the final authority in the sense that you mean.

 

[truefiction1]

If Scripture is not the sole authority, then we can only be our own authorities, which means there is nothing the two of us can discuss. But, then you concede, your soteriology is unbiblical.

Of a truth, we can in reality only be our own authorities, as you have said. You have chosen, by the authority invested naturally in you, to believe that Scripture is the sole authority in matters of belief. But it is you, ultimately, who have decided this based upon your own experience, which has shaped your map of reality, or "world view", which is also your own personal religion. My own map of existential reality likely includes some information that you, at least as of yet, have not come upon. This is why you and I differ in our understanding and interpretation of Scripture.

If this explanation is not enough to convince you, then I could show you, using the very Scripture which you claim is infallible, that it is indeed fallible and can even be misleading to believers, causing them to suffer great confusion, or what might be termed "cognitive dissonance" when they have misconceptions regarding the limits of the authority of Scripture. A person's faith in God is the usual victim when this dissonance becomes to powerful to be resolved.

But you may not have reached the point in your life's journey where you are quite ready to throw off the chains of your cultural lendings and stand naked in the storm of reality -- that reality being that there is no such thing as an infallible source of truth, except God, whose only infallible human teacher is His Christ. What God has tasked each an every one of us in the lifetime that He has gifted us with, is an ongoing search for truth by means of which each of us does our own unique part in contributing to the growth of an ever expanding human map of reality, of which worship, art, and science all play a vital part. This is the nature of His design, of which we only now know in part, and not a single one of us is currently capable of seeing the whole.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

You are debating Orthodox Christians in here. This is against forum rules. If you want to come in here and ask questions, explore the Orthodox faith, and contribute, that's awesome and it's welcomed, but you are debating, teaching, and arguing with the tenets of the Orthodox Church. Either take the debating urges to St. Justin's or follow the forum rules and just ask and listen and say nice things. Thanks.

God is not impotent, He is not merely doing the "best He can."


St. James says that faith without works is counterfeit.


I believe you are misapplying things.


No, that's not how it works. God literally changed Nebuchadnezzar's will in Daniel 4! Free will was violated and God reserves the right to violate it when He sees fit.



One person here already conceded He does not believe the Scripture is the final authority on these matters. Do you care to join him or am I correct in saying the Bible is the final authority and perhaps incorrect in how I apply it?

 

[truefiction1]

You are debating Orthodox Christians in here. This is against forum rules. If you want to come in here and ask questions, explore the Orthodox faith, and contribute, that's awesome and it's welcomed, but you are debating, teaching, and arguing with the tenets of the Orthodox Church. Either take the debating urges to St. Justin's or follow the forum rules and just ask and listen and say nice things. Thanks.

Abaccab is well aware of this rule, as indicated in his earliest post. I'm to blame as much as him for drawing him into discussion regarding the nature of human freedom, which I feel is an important discussion for people to engage in. It is central to our understanding of who and what we are in relation to God and to our world.

Sorry about that. I only hope that the discussion has been of some benefit to some of us.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I'm ok with the discussion. Human free will is a fascinating and helpful discussion imho. I just think Abacab needs to clean up how he addresses Orthodox posters and cool down the debating hostile tone. A little Devil's Advocate I'm ok with and asking questions, just jumping and pouncing and pontificating, not ok with that....

Abaccab is well aware of this rule, as indicated in his earliest post. I'm to blame as much as him for drawing him into discussion regarding the nature of human freedom, which I feel is an important discussion for people to engage in. It is central to our understanding of who and what we are in relation to God and to our world.

Sorry about that. I only hope that the discussion has been of some benefit to some of us.

 

[abacabb3]

I'm ok with the discussion. Human free will is a fascinating and helpful discussion imho. I just think Abacab needs to clean up how he addresses Orthodox posters and cool down the debating hostile tone. A little Devil's Advocate I'm ok with and asking questions, just jumping and pouncing and pontificating, not ok with that....

What about my tone is not civil?

 

[Philothei]

If Scripture is not the sole authority, then we can only be our own authorities, which means there is nothing the two of us can discuss. But, then you concede, your soteriology is unbiblical.



No, God is not responsible. The men who executed Jesus were "wicked," even though God preordained the event. Men are in effect the secondary cause and carry the weight of responsibility.

There is no such a thing as the word "soterilogy" in the Bible... for starters that "part" of scholastic western idea of "theology" is NOT even there in the beginning of Christianity. So why bother saying that "our" soteriology is unbiblical??? No point! This theology is not a "child" of EO concept of salvation... It is thus a later development...

No, that's not how it works. God literally changed Nebuchadnezzar's will in Daniel 4! Free will was violated and God reserves the right to violate it when He sees fit.



One person here already conceded He does not believe the Scripture is the final authority on these matters. Do you care to join him or am I correct in saying the Bible is the final authority and perhaps incorrect in how I apply it?

God cannot act on a human will...He can "make himself present" but still a person needs faith to believe that God is calling him to Him... There is a struggle with God there is a leap of faith...God does not reveal Himself to ALL for that very reason because He won't overide our will. He wants us to freely come to Him... Jonah could have denied God ; like many do everyday...they deny to believe despite of their own lives been turned around by God as mere coincidences...

 

[Philothei]

The wisdom of the Holy Spirit given to St. Paul.

For it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure. (Phil 2:13)


For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. (Romans 9:15-18)

This is why St. Augustine speaks of us cooperating with God's mercy, because though we have free will, God's mercy clearly shapes our will and efforts. We are not autonomous free agents. Only God is autonomous.

both quote mines of some Calvinist site...Please do not quote out of context this is just neither theology nor scripture I can prove anything quoting unrelated verses... the sky the limit to what kind of theology I can come up with if I decide to do this.....Maybe a million types of theologies that are out there?

 

[abacabb3]

both quote mines of some Calvinist site...

My own website, I can plagiarize myself.

Please do not quote out of context this is just neither theology nor scripture I can prove anything quoting unrelated verses... the sky the limit to what kind of theology I can come up with if I decide to do this.....Maybe a million types of theologies that are out there?

THe problem is that is the proper context in Scripture. We already had two people here say that Scripture here is not the final authority, do you care to join them or is there something specifically wrong with my interpretation?

 

[abacabb3]

There is no such a thing as the word "soterilogy" in the Bible...

Very true, I only responded because that is the name of the thread.

for starters that "part" of scholastic western idea of "theology" is NOT even there in the beginning of Christianity.

Well it is addressed by Augustine, but you can argue that he wrote at "too late a date." But, then it is spoken about by Clement in his letter to the Corinthians, which is the earliest writing outside of the Bible, which also talks about it. So, it is important.

God cannot act on a human will...

But, he did to Nebuchadnezzar and Pharoah. He did to Lydia. There are biblical examples of this.

God does not reveal Himself to ALL for that very reason because He won't overide our will.

I will recant if you can find specifically where the Scripture says that, because I have shown, it does discuss at length my own position.

 

[truefiction1]

THe problem is that is the proper context in Scripture. We already had two people here say that Scripture here is not the final authority, do you care to join them or is there something specifically wrong with my interpretation?

The real problem lies in mistaken interpretations of Pauline thought, which cannot see that Paul, especially in His epistle to Romans, attempts to define important aspects of the Gospel by using "paradox". What he does is to set up two seemingly opposing ideas, such as salvation by faith as opposed to by works, and then tries to show that these two ideas (which the unenlightened spirit cannot reconcile), must of a truth be reconciled in the psyche of a believer in order for them to realize True Life in Christ. Paul is trying to show how predestination and human freedom, two seemingly contradictory ideas, both exist together in their fulness. He is not trying to diminish the role of works in salvation, nor is he trying to abolish the idea of man's freewill and personal responsibility over themselves. For him to do so would contradict much of the rest of Scripture.

But acquiring the real meaning of much of scripture is not accomplished as a mere intellectual exercise only. Repentance, unceasing prayer, fasting, and meditation upon the Word of God, and freely choosing to put God's will before your own is the only proper way to approach scripture, not as a quest to find proof texts by which we may win dogmatic arguments. That is why we say that the Scripture, by itself, is not the final authority. The person living life within the realm of human experience, guided into proper action by the light of the Holy Spirit, is the only authority. Such persons comprise Christ's true Church.

 

[ArmyMatt]

My own website, I can plagiarize myself.



THe problem is that is the proper context in Scripture. We already had two people here say that Scripture here is not the final authority, do you care to join them or is there something specifically wrong with my interpretation?

if you are lumping me in that group, you need to actually read what people say. I did not say that Scripture is not the final authority.

But, he did to Nebuchadnezzar and Pharoah. He did to Lydia. There are biblical examples of this.

no, your example from Daniel says nowhere that God actually forced the King's will

 

[Tigger45]

The real problem lies in mistaken interpretations of Pauline thought, which cannot see that Paul, especially in His epistle to Romans, attempts to define important aspects of the Gospel by using "paradox". What he does is to set up two seemingly opposing ideas, such as salvation by faith as opposed to by works, and then tries to show that these two ideas (which the unenlightened spirit cannot reconcile), must of a truth be reconciled in the psyche of a believer in order for them to realize True Life in Christ. Paul is trying to show how predestination and human freedom, two seemingly contradictory ideas, both exist together in their fulness. He is not trying to diminish the role of works in salvation, nor is he trying to abolish the idea of man's freewill and personal responsibility over themselves. For him to do so would contradict much of the rest of Scripture.

But acquiring the real meaning of much of scripture is not accomplished as a mere intellectual exercise only. Repentance, unceasing prayer, fasting, and meditation upon the Word of God, and freely choosing to put God's will before your own is the only proper way to approach scripture, not as a quest to find proof texts by which we may win dogmatic arguments. That is why we say that the Scripture, by itself, is not the final authority. The person living life within the realm of human experience, guided into proper action by the light of the Holy Spirit, is the only authority. Such persons comprise Christ's true Church.

Wow, thank you. This to me is an excellent summary of how scripture was originally intended to be approached and understood.

After attending an EO parish I was enlightened to the fact that the HS spoke to and through people with an Eastern paradigm.

Me with a Western, black and white and legalistic process of thinking am still trying to get my mind to shift paradigms.

 

[truefiction1]

Wow, thank you. This to me is an excellent summary of how scripture was originally intended to be approached and understood.

After attending an EO parish I was enlightened to the fact that the HS spoke to and through people with an Eastern paradigm.

Me with a Western, black and white and legalistic process of thinking am still trying to get my mind to shift paradigms.

You're welcome, and thank you.

 

[abacabb3]

if you are lumping me in that group, you need to actually read what people say. I did not say that Scripture is not the final authority.

Just to remind you:
" seeing as how it took a generation after the ascension for the Apostles to start writing, and 400 years for the NT to be codified into that canon that we know, it is not the final authority in the sense that you mean."

This is what truefiction said:
"I personally temper my understanding of scripture with the knowledge that its writers and editors were much more limited in their understanding of many objective realities than we ourselves are today"

If any of you today have a better understanding of God than St. Paul, as you are implicitly saying here, then I must vehemently disagree and cling to the authority of Scripture.

no, your example from Daniel says nowhere that God actually forced the King's will

1. Would it even matter if it did, because it took centuries to codify the Scriptures?
2. An honest reading of the text does not allow this interpretation:

"The king’s heart is like channels of water in the hand of the Lord;
He turns it wherever He wishes." (Prov 21:1)

This is the proper context to understand Daniel 4:24-25
"[Daniel says, "]this is the interpretation, O king, and this is the decree of the Most High, which has come upon my lord the king: that you be driven away from mankind and your dwelling place be with the beasts of the field, and you be given grass to eat like cattle and be drenched with the dew of heaven; and seven [x]periods of time will pass over you, until you recognize that the Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind and bestows it on whomever He wishes."

And then

Immediately the word concerning Nebuchadnezzar was fulfilled; and he was driven away from mankind and began eating grass like cattle, and his body was drenched with the dew of heaven until his hair had grown like eagles’ feathers and his nails like birds’ claws. "But at the end of that period, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High and praised and honored Him who lives forever" (33, 34)

God took away his reason and turned him into a beast, manipulating him like water. It is fine if you don't want to believe what the Scripture says, but clearly that is what it says!

 

[abacabb3]

Of a truth, we can in reality only be our own authorities, as you have said.

I disagree, truth is not subjective, it exists in reality apart from it being accepted by anyone.

If this explanation is not enough to convince you, then I could show you, using the very Scripture which you claim is infallible, that it is indeed fallible and can even be misleading to believers, causing them to suffer great confusion, or what might be termed "cognitive dissonance" when they have misconceptions regarding the limits of the authority of Scripture.

God forbid this thought! All Scripture is God breathed and useful for instruction.

But you may not have reached the point in your life's journey where you are quite ready to throw off the chains of your cultural lendings and stand naked in the storm of reality -- that reality being that there is no such thing as an infallible source of truth, except God, whose only infallible human teacher is His Christ.

This is a dangerous way to search for truth. it is the way of the Muslim mystic, the Buddhist monk, the neoplatonist philosopher, who in their heart of hearts wants to taste the divine. But, how do you know then you are not being demonically deceived?

Faith is the substance of things hoped for that we do not see. I place my faith in God and His only recorded source of revealed truth. Truth revealed by God is of a higher source than that our minds can comprehend on our own.

If you seek truth from anything other than His revelation, then you seek it from yourself. That is a lower authority than God.

The real problem lies in mistaken interpretations of Pauline thought, which cannot see that Paul, especially in His epistle to Romans, attempts to define important aspects of the Gospel by using "paradox". What he does is to set up two seemingly opposing ideas, such as salvation by faith as opposed to by works, and then tries to show that these two ideas (which the unenlightened spirit cannot reconcile), must of a truth be reconciled in the psyche of a believer in order for them to realize True Life in Christ. Paul is trying to show how predestination and human freedom, two seemingly contradictory ideas, both exist together in their fulness. He is not trying to diminish the role of works in salvation, nor is he trying to abolish the idea of man's freewill and personal responsibility over themselves. For him to do so would contradict much of the rest of Scripture.

1. If the writer's of Scripture are deficient in the ways you stated, then why even care what is the proper interpretation of Paul's thought?

2. What is mistaken here? I don't necessarily disagree that we like with a paradoxical truth: man implicitly has a measure of free will, yet God is sovereign over even the mind of man: "The mind of man plans his way, But the Lord directs his steps." (Prov 16:19)

For this reason we much approach God with humility. I know that I have free will, but I also know that I never willed anything faithful until God changed my heart, which is my very will. So, that is our measure of free will, for God has the veto power. The Scripture says distinctly:

Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking [a]by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed”; and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:3)

I cannot even confess in my mouth that Christ is Lord or believe in my heart that He rose from the dead apart from the Holy Spirit. In that sense, in every faithful Christian is a supernatural miracle playing itself out in real time.

 

[truefiction1]

I disagree, truth is not subjective, it exists in reality apart from it being accepted by anyone.

I don't disagree with you on this regard, but face it, you and you alone have chosen to believe that Scripture is what you believe it to be, and have decided to subject yourself to what you believe to be its infallible authority. You decided that -- you. So how can you claim that you have not made Scripture authoritative over yourself by your own authority? We all have a mental map of reality contained within our minds. Mine is different from yours on account of my life experience and education/training. I don't make scripture the only source of knowledge, by my choice, because I understand that it can easily be misinterpreted, especially by those lacking in emotional intelligence and psychological (spiritual) maturity.

God forbid this thought! All Scripture is God breathed and useful for instruction.

Breathed, really? Would that include the New world translation "breathed" by the Jehovah's self-appointed Witnesses? Or maybe the Book of Mormon? And which canon of Scripture is the real McCoy? The one used by the Orthodox Christians, or the Roman Catholics, or that used by the Protestant reformers, whose Bibles contain fewer books than the other two Churches. And besides that, how do we really know that the Bible is the Bible unless we trust the men who decided which of the early Christian writings belonged and which didn't? Yes, men decided which writings belonged. By what authority did they do this, seeing how they didn't have scriptural instruction telling them which books were okay? Clearly, they made their decisions about these books based on some other kind of authority.

This is a dangerous way to search for truth. it is the way of the Muslim mystic, the Buddhist monk, the neoplatonist philosopher, who in their heart of hearts wants to taste the divine. But, how do you know then you are not being demonically deceived?

It is also the way of a Christian ascetic, and yes, it is dangerous, but irreplaceable as a source of truth. Suffering and deprivation are the only paths to a level of knowledge and understanding not attained by any other means, and temptation and deception is encountered and must be overcome with the help of God.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for that we do not see. I place my faith in God and His only recorded source of revealed truth. Truth revealed by God is of a higher source than that our minds can comprehend on our own.

I agree that God's truth is greater than our minds can comprehend. What you and many others do not realize however, is that those Muslim mystics and Buddhist monks that you have so handily invalidated above have also experienced that same revealed truth, which is why they too insist that theirs is the true faith. Subjectively their religious experience is identical to that of our Christian saints, the differences are in the objective beliefs. But our Bible would have many of us believe that those standing outside of Christianity are totally godless. And you know those other semitic peoples who lived in the land of Canaan, the ones that Yahweh allegedly commanded the Israelites to entirely wipe out, showing no mercy to even the women and children as a condition of their inheriting the promised land? Well, they were just people. They were no more evil or less deserving of living in peace than the Israelis who so ruthlessly killed them in order to gain possession of the promised land. What really happened is that the Hebrews murdered and slaughtered those people because they wanted to steel what they had, then they justified it by believing that they were God's favored people and therefore had the right to kill those godless outsiders. And today we condemn Muslims as backward terrorists for having a similar mentality to those ancient Jews. If they are backward, and I agree that they are, then so is our Bible, and we must recognize it as such to a degree, or else remain every bit as backward as the Islamic extremists.

Another thing to consider, just as one of many examples, is that neither their faith in God nor their search for answers in the Bible could save the millions of victims of the bubonic plague, who turned to both in order to spare their loved ones this horrid death. They suffered and died anyhow, without anyone to comfort them. But it was ultimately the discovery that the disease was spread by rats infested with the disease carrying lice that finally enabled us to stop this disease, and God-given scientific curiosity that later led to the synthesis of medicines by which we could defeat it. Where in the Bible did it teach us about the rat lice? Just saying, ya know?

If you seek truth from anything other than His revelation, then you seek it from yourself. That is a lower authority than God.

Nah, we should seek truth wherever it is and by any means possible: through various branches of science, the arts, poetry, literature, philosophy, Religious tradition, mythology, etc.

Truth is truth, wherever it is revealed.

1. If the writer's of Scripture are deficient in the ways you stated, then why even care what is the proper interpretation of Paul's thought?

Because people are always misunderstanding Paul's thought, which leads to many divisions and denominations. That stinks.

2. What is mistaken here? I don't necessarily disagree that we like with a paradoxical truth: man implicitly has a measure of free will, yet God is sovereign over even the mind of man: "The mind of man plans his way, But the Lord directs his steps." (Prov 16:19)

I already told you before: we get it, we really do. Man does not choose what happens to him. I did not choose to be born, nor do I wish to die, and I control very little of what happens in between. most things I have no say in. It goes without saying. But given your logic, then "Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, declares the Lord God, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live?" means that none of us have anything to worry about regardless of our wickedness, because God wills us to turn from our wicked ways and live, and what God wills God makes happen, and we have absolutely no choice in the matter -- we're all saved in the end and that's that! Awsome! I can go and covet my neighbor's wife now.

For this reason we much approach God with humility. I know that I have free will, but I also know that I never willed anything faithful until God changed my heart, which is my very will. So, that is our measure of free will, for God has the veto power. The Scripture says distinctly:

I think that those of us who belong to our Church understand this quite well. The Church and the Bible teach us that God desires all to turn to Him and receive the kind of Life that only He can give, and stands at the door of our hearts knocking, and it is left up to us whether to let Him in and how long to let Him remain there. Besides, the Orthodox are the ones who repeatedly implore the Lord for His mercy. Ever been to an Orthodox prayer service?

Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking [a]by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed”; and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:3)

I cannot even confess in my mouth that Christ is Lord or believe in my heart that He rose from the dead apart from the Holy Spirit. In that sense, in every faithful Christian is a supernatural miracle playing itself out in real time.

Yes, we know this too. It is from our subjective experience within the Church. We've been living this way since Pentecost and will continue to do so until the return of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.