Can Orthodox Learn from Protestant Theologians?

[ArmyMatt]

You seem to think my problem is fundamental.

yes, I do

But the thing is, the vast majority of human population does not view things the same way you think that because we are fallible we can't learn from each other. Rather, it is largely the opposit: because we are fallible, we need to get input from each other to correct each other.

agreed. but once you find the Truth, you tend not to follow what you know to be false.

And I'm pretty close to just saying forget it since I would have to convert to Orthodox before you would ever consider looking at what I said. So much for learning from Protestants. What a joke.

I did look at what you said, a few times.

 

[All Becomes New]

I never said I can’t learn from you, I said as far as the post you gave, its premise has some red flags.

But the fact remains that as long as I don't think like you or have the same paradigm as you that you can't learn from me.

 

[All Becomes New]

agreed. but once you find the Truth, you tend not to follow what you know to be false.

What you mean by this is that unless I am Orthodox. Don't pretend you mean anything else by it.

I did look at what you said, a few times.

Yet, you have said nothing about it.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Of course, you have "an answer" to this. If you didn't, your whole tradition would crumble to the ground. That does not mean your answer succeeds. It's the same exact thing I ran into talking to a Calvinist about 1 Joh 2:2 in that he was saying it poses no problem for limited atonement. Everyone is sure that their tradition is correct. No one wants to give an inch.

well, the point was that you said Nicaea II defends something not found in the Apostles. we would it’s there. now, you might disagree with the conclusion, but that’s not the same thing as saying a belief isn’t from the first century. I disagree on how Rome views the Pope, but I can see where they get it from the Bible.

I try and be faithful to scripture. I am not saying I am infallible. I am as fallible as anyone. But you learn as you go. A wise man recently told me, when I asked him how I know if I am reaching my potential in being an online evangelist, he said that if it feels like I am banging my head against a wall (what it seems like talking with you) to step back and reevaluate. I immediately thought of my conversation with the Calvinist who is sure that 1 John 2:2 poses no problem for limited atonement. It's the same thing with you and interpreting literally everything through tradition.

I don’t interpret everything through tradition, Orthodox see the Scripture as a fundamental part of the Tradition. Scripture isn’t some separate thing.

 

[ArmyMatt]

But the fact remains that as long as I don't think like you or have the same paradigm as you that you can't learn from me.

not true. I learn a lot from reading CS Lewis, and he doesn’t have the same paradigm as me.

 

[ArmyMatt]

What you mean by this is that unless I am Orthodox. Don't pretend you mean anything else by it.

of course, why would I be Orthodox if I didn’t believe it to be the fullness of the Truth?

Yet, you have said nothing about it.

because it’s flawed out the gate

 

[All Becomes New]

I don’t interpret everything through tradition, Orthodox see the Scripture as a fundamental part of the Tradition. Scripture isn’t some separate thing.

You literally just contradicted your own view.

not true. I learn a lot from reading CS Lewis, and he doesn’t have the same paradigm as me.

And then claim what CS Lewis knows as your own, just like Muhamed did with so many.

 

[All Becomes New]

because it’s flawed out the gate

Okay, nice talking with you.

 

[ArmyMatt]

You literally just contradicted your own view.

how so?

And then claim what CS Lewis knows as your own, just like Muhamed did with so many.

not exactly, it’s his, but more like St Paul on Mars Hill

 

[ArmyMatt]

Okay, nice talking with you.

you wanted an answer, that’s mine. you speak of man’s fallibility, then present a view which is primarily you giving your take on Scripture, with nothing really to back up your view of Scripture aside from your view on other verses of the very interpretation you were trying to explain.

 

[All Becomes New]

you wanted an answer, that’s mine. you speak of man’s fallibility, then present a view which is primarily you giving your take on Scripture, with nothing really to back up your view of Scripture aside from your view on other verses of the very interpretation you were trying to explain.

Fair enough. Then just don't use my interpretation. In fact, don't use any of my interpretations of any of scripture. That goes for not only you but the Orthodox Church as a whole.

How does that sound?

 

[All Becomes New]

I've studied this and thought about it for years. So for you to just dismiss everything I am saying because I think I am fallible as some kind of idiotic technicality is lame.

 

[All Becomes New]

How stupid!

What person in the Orthodox Church is going to come in and say, "BTW, I am infallible. Therefore, what I say goes." Literally, everyone should think they are fallible.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Fair enough. Then just don't use my interpretation. In fact, don't use any of my interpretations of any of scripture. That goes for not only you but the Orthodox Church as a whole.

How does that sound?

that depends on on what you are saying and if you are actually backing it up.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I've studied this and thought about it for years. So for you to just dismiss everything I am saying because I think I am fallible as some kind of idiotic technicality is lame.

not everything, just the link you posted.

 

[All Becomes New]

that depends on on what you are saying and if you are actually backing it up.

Literally all you are saying is, "Unless it fits with my particular tradition."

IDK, use your brain and see if it makes sense. Reasoning is not inept at arriving at knowledge. Or do you think CS Lewis is somehow infallible or made any claims like that?

 

[ArmyMatt]

How stupid!

What person in the Orthodox Church is going to come in and say, "BTW, I am infallible. Therefore, what I say goes." Literally, everyone should think they are fallible.

no one, that’s why we submit to the consensus from the beginning. we submit to what the Church has consistently taught.

 

[All Becomes New]

not everything, just the link you posted.

That's like me telling you, "I don't have a problem with your religion. Just your traditions."

 

[All Becomes New]

no one, that’s why we submit to the consensus from the beginning. we submit to what the Church has consistently taught.

In other words, there is nothing new that you can uncover in the scriptures. Thanks, I think I'm done.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Literally all you are saying is, "Unless it fits with my particular tradition."

IDK, use your brain and see if it makes sense. Reasoning is not inept at arriving at knowledge. Or do you think CS Lewis is somehow infallible or made any claims like that?

no, because the Tradition isn’t mine. I didn’t make it up. reasoning can be inept. many televangelists are very rational, it’s just that their premises are wonky which leads to weird conclusions.