Eastern Orthodox View of the Merits of Works

[~Anastasia~]

Stuart ... do you believe I'm not a Christian?

Is that's what is behind all these posts?

 

[stuart lawrence]

Stuart ... do you believe I'm not a Christian?

Is that's what is behind all these posts?

The thought never crossed my mind, honestly.
And I hope you have not been upset by our discussion.

 

[~Anastasia~]

The thought never crossed my mind, honestly.
And I hope you have not been upset by our discussion.

No, I'm not upset at all.

I'm just trying to understand where the block in communication seems to be.

We seem to be talking completely past one another, so I'm trying to get at what you mean by your posts, because (forgive me) you really don't seem to be engaging what I've said, and perhaps I'm not engaging what you said to your satisfaction, because you seem to keep saying the same things. And they don't seem to answer what I am saying, for the most part.

So I'm trying to understand.

 

[stuart lawrence]

No, I'm not upset at all.

I'm just trying to understand where the block in communication seems to be.

We seem to be talking completely past one another, so I'm trying to get at what you mean by your posts, because (forgive me) you really don't seem to be engaging what I've said, and perhaps I'm not engaging what you said to your satisfaction, because you seem to keep saying the same things. And they don't seem to answer what I am saying, for the most part.

So I'm trying to understand.

As I see it, the difference between us is probably twofold.

You appear not to wholeheartedly embrace lets say a righteousness of faith in Christ for the whole of your christian life. In my view, that is far more important an emphasis to stress than the partaking of sacraments.
You seem to believe I do not accept the letter of some of the bible, but i would say that letter is emphatically clear. Faith in Christ is the christians righteousness. However, as you alluded to. Most will not accept it, for they see it as a licence to sin.
The second thing I this. I simply do not believe Christianity firstly revolves around sacraments, or, sacraments should not be the Christians main focus in their walk.
But rather a life built on prayer, bible reading and coming ever closer to God in our hearts. Being ever more willing to take up our individual cross and follow Christ

In my view these most important things do not come from partaking of communion for example. But rather, when our main focus is on the things described, then communion will mean more to us, for in our hearts we have come evermore close to God.
Hope That makes sense.
Glad I have not upset you

 

[~Anastasia~]

As I see it, the difference between us is probably twofold.

You appear not to wholeheartedly embrace lets say a righteousness of faith in Christ for the whole of your christian life. In my view, that is far more important an emphasis to stress than the partaking of sacraments.
You seem to believe I do not accept the letter of some of the bible, but i would say that letter is emphatically clear. Faith in Christ is the christians righteousness. However, as you alluded to. Most will not accept it, for they see it as a licence to sin.
The second thing I this. I simply do not believe Christianity firstly revolves around sacraments, or, sacraments should not be the Christians main focus in their walk.
But rather a life built on prayer, bible reading and coming ever closer to God in our hearts. Being ever more willing to take up our individual cross and follow Christ

In my view these most important things do not come from partaking of communion for example. But rather, when our main focus is on the things described, then communion will mean more to us, for in our hearts we have come evermore close to God.
Hope That makes sense.
Glad I have not upset you

Thank you for explaining. It makes much more sense now to see where you're coming from. Not sure if I have time to really reply right now, but I will soon.

Thanks again.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Thank you for explaining. It makes much more sense now to see where you're coming from. Not sure if I have time to really reply right now, but I will soon.

Thanks again.

Let me explain somewhat further, to allay peoples fears.
The christian is a work in progress all their life. They never will attain to sinless perfection on this earth.
While they are this work in progress they are imperfect in the flesh, but walking evermore in line with how God wants them to live. As one thing is dealt with in their life, God brings another issue to their attention that needs dealing with, and so it goes on. Needless to say, the more important things that need dealing with are prioritised. They are firstly revealed as where change is most needed. The believer hates their imperfections/sin and earnestly seeks victory over their imperfections so they may live an evermore holy life for God.
In this sense, they are following after the Holy Spirit in the truth of the Gospel message
So when the believer I walking in the work of progress, they are following after Christ, not the world. And so, though they are imperfect I the flesh, they know their righteousness is faith in Christ, no condemnation. And scripturally speaking, this knowledge will bring dramatic victory over sin. The results of the work I progress will be great.
However, it is possible for christians to step outside of the work in progress, either for a day, or longer, depending on the stubbornness of the individual. They commit what we would call, wilfull sin, rather than sin they commit while being the work in progress, for no christian can satisfy the demands of the law.
When wilfull sin is committed, it is impossible for the christian to say:
Faith I my righteousness, so no problem I committed such sin
They must then have a very troubled conscience, and they will have no rest, no peace until they come before their father I heaven and seek forgiveness for their erring from the true path. And God will forgive them, for they are his child. He does not abandon his children at the slightest infringement of following the path of a work in progress. Then, the believer has their peace back. For wilfull sin is transgressing what I written in your mind and placed on your heart. It is utterly impossible to transgress what is on your heart without that resulting I great remorse and a seered conscience.
The heart and mind were born again, but the flesh was not. Hence the eternal battle of spirit against flesh

 

[~Anastasia~]

Let me explain somewhat further, to allay peoples fears.
The christian is a work in progress all their life. They never will attain to sinless perfection on this earth.
While they are this work in progress they are imperfect in the flesh, but walking evermore in line with how God wants them to live. As one thing is dealt with in their life, God brings another issue to their attention that needs dealing with, and so it goes on. Needless to say, the more important things that need dealing with are prioritised. They are firstly revealed as where change is most needed. The believer hates their imperfections/sin and earnestly seeks victory over their imperfections so they may live an evermore holy life for God.
In this sense, they are following after the Holy Spirit in the truth of the Gospel message
So when the believer I walking in the work of progress, they are following after Christ, not the world. And so, though they are imperfect I the flesh, they know their righteousness is faith in Christ, no condemnation. And scripturally speaking, this knowledge will bring dramatic victory over sin. The results of the work I progress will be great.
However, it is possible for christians to step outside of the work in progress, either for a day, or longer, depending on the stubbornness of the individual. They commit what we would call, wilfull sin, rather than sin they commit while being the work in progress, for no christian can satisfy the demands of the law.
When wilfull sin is committed, it is impossible for the christian to say:
Faith I my righteousness, so no problem I committed such sin
They must then have a very troubled conscience, and they will have no rest, no peace until they come before their father I heaven and seek forgiveness for their erring from the true path. And God will forgive them, for they are his child. He does not abandon his children at the slightest infringement of following the path of a work in progress. Then, the believer has their peace back. For wilfull sin is transgressing what I written in your mind and placed on your heart. It is utterly impossible to transgress what is on your heart without that resulting I great remorse and a seered conscience.
The heart and mind were born again, but the flesh was not. Hence the eternal battle of spirit against flesh

That actually helps me understand you quite a bit more, and I'm glad to read it.

Honestly, in so many ways, we are really not that far apart. I've experienced what you speak of in this post, both during my time as a Protestant and as an Orthodox Christian.

I would not disagree with any of the major points.

Looking over it, the only minor point I might make is that the believer can also be deeply grieved over what is not what I think you call "willful sin".

I'm guessing by that you mean a person decides that, even though I'm not weak and I don't have to, and even though I know it's a sin, I'm going to do it anyway because I want to. Is that what you mean? Or maybe it also includes something not so blatant? Such sins as just deciding to sin are terrible in my mind.

But a person might also regret smaller shortcomings. Not even the breaking of any law, but just wishing we were more fervent in prayer, more courageous in speaking, desiring more to spend time in God's presence, more generous in giving to the poor. These shortcomings can grieve a person before God as well.

But we don't look at ANY of this in a legalistic sense.

Just as we cannot purchase or merit salvation through our works, neither do we fear that we slip in and out of salvation with every sin and repentance. That's an exhausting thought! (I used to belong to a Pentecostal congregation that taught this.)

So it's not about buying or losing salvation.

But it IS about being formed in the likeness of Christ, and being healed from the effects of sin. These are only possible by the power of God as well though, so we don't "work" for them, but what we do, or don't do, good or bad, can have an effect on the work God is doing in us. You seem to be agreeing with that kind of process?

 

[~Anastasia~]

The Sacraments seem to be a side issue to this particular discussion that have caused confusion. Clearly you don't regard them in the same way, so I think consideration of them clouds the issue.

If you do wish to discuss them, it might be best in a separate thread (and maybe only after we are done here). I'm up for it (though no expert), but the entanglement seems to have made this discussion difficult to sort out.

 

[~Anastasia~]

As I see it, the difference between us is probably twofold.

You appear not to wholeheartedly embrace lets say a righteousness of faith in Christ for the whole of your christian life. In my view, that is far more important an emphasis to stress than the partaking of sacraments.
You seem to believe I do not accept the letter of some of the bible, but i would say that letter is emphatically clear. Faith in Christ is the christians righteousness. However, as you alluded to. Most will not accept it, for they see it as a licence to sin.
The second thing I this. I simply do not believe Christianity firstly revolves around sacraments, or, sacraments should not be the Christians main focus in their walk.
But rather a life built on prayer, bible reading and coming ever closer to God in our hearts. Being ever more willing to take up our individual cross and follow Christ

In my view these most important things do not come from partaking of communion for example. But rather, when our main focus is on the things described, then communion will mean more to us, for in our hearts we have come evermore close to God.
Hope That makes sense.
Glad I have not upset you

I think as I mentioned that the Sacraments need to be discussed separately.

We do have something of a difference, but I think it is not what you are thinking? I believe I see your concern now though.

Our righteousness is purely in Christ, certainly. Our salvation is purely through Him, and NOT of anything we do. We cannot save ourselves, nor "contribute materially" to our salvation.

But there is a difference in how we would describe salvation.

This comes, I think, from a change that happened in Catholicism, and because all Protestants have their beginnings there, in general most have inherited the particular focus.

I'm guessing that your primary thoughts about salvation have to do with a courtroom type focus? All about what laws we have broken, what sins we have committed, and whether the penalty has been paid (or more accurately, if we ACCEPT that payment made on our behalf) - or not. Please correct me if I'm wrongly understanding you? But that's pretty much how all Protestants seem to see things, and as far as I can tell with their highly developed theology if mortal sins, venial sins, penance, and purgatory - I'm guessing Catholics lean pretty strongly that way too.

And in a sense, I do agree with what you've said. It's not that I would disagree that this dynamic exists. Christ DID die for our salvation.

But where I think we would differ, and I hope you'll understand me here and not think I'm denying our righteousness through Christ - what I think separates us is that in your thinking, I'm guessing that's the "whole pie". Where in the thinking of the early Church, as in Orthodoxy today, it's a large slice of the total pie.

Now, please don't assume I'm "adding works righteousness" because that seems to be the immediate assumption - "faith vs. works". But that's NOT what I'm talking about.

Another large slice of the pie is Christ's victory over death. Not ONLY did He come to redeem us from our sins, but He ALSO came to reverse the curse of death that fell on us through our separation from God, who is the source of life. That is hugely important, and is all over Scripture as well.

And another large slice is the healing of our natures, the actual restoration of the image of God in us, as we were created to become. We will be like Christ, not covered over and made to look kind of like Him, not just seen through the lens of Christ, but actually healed of the results of sin and made like Him.

I doubt you would deny that Christ defeats death, or that we will become like Him. It's just that it has become pushed aside in favor of legal justification, and essentially lost or ignored in many theologies.

But in the Orthodox Church, we joyously embrace ALL of this - not only forgiveness of sins, but eternal life and actually being co-heirs with Christ.

When I started to focus on how MUCH God is granting us in our redemption through Christ, I became that much more thankful.

It's not just a "get out of hell free" card. It's eternal life, and ever increasing from glory to glory, in the presence of and communion with God.

 

[stuart lawrence]

That actually helps me understand you quite a bit more, and I'm glad to read it.

Honestly, in so many ways, we are really not that far apart. I've experienced what you speak of in this post, both during my time as a Protestant and as an Orthodox Christian.

I would not disagree with any of the major points.

Looking over it, the only minor point I might make is that the believer can also be deeply grieved over what is not what I think you call "willful sin".

I'm guessing by that you mean a person decides that, even though I'm not weak and I don't have to, and even though I know it's a sin, I'm going to do it anyway because I want to. Is that what you mean? Or maybe it also includes something not so blatant? Such sins as just deciding to sin are terrible in my mind.

But a person might also regret smaller shortcomings. Not even the breaking of any law, but just wishing we were more fervent in prayer, more courageous in speaking, desiring more to spend time in God's presence, more generous in giving to the poor. These shortcomings can grieve a person before God as well.

But we don't look at ANY of this in a legalistic sense.

Just as we cannot purchase or merit salvation through our works, neither do we fear that we slip in and out of salvation with every sin and repentance. That's an exhausting thought! (I used to belong to a Pentecostal congregation that taught this.)

So it's not about buying or losing salvation.

But it IS about being formed in the likeness of Christ, and being healed from the effects of sin. These are only possible by the power of God as well though, so we don't "work" for them, but what we do, or don't do, good or bad, can have an effect on the work God is doing in us. You seem to be agreeing with that kind of process?

There are two types of sin in my view. And they must be viewed very differently.

IE

An alcoholic becomes a christian, they have been enslaved by alcohol for thirty years. Some sin immediately ceases upon conversion, other sin that has deeply entangled itself in us takes time to be delivered from.
The christian has to cross over from being a slave to sin when they come to Christ, into a slave of righteousness leading to holiness( rom ch6) but it takes time.
The christian seeks this justification of their christianity by faith In Christ( gal2:16&17)

So the alcoholic hates his drinking, he is desperate to be free of it, and trusts Christ to deliver him from it. Though he drink far too much, he stands In a righteousness of faith in Christ, trusting him for victory over the alcohol.
Lets say after a month he is delivered from alcohol, he is no longer its slave. He sinned during that month concerning alcohol, yet at the same Time he was being led of the holy spirit In the truth of the Gospel message as to how to have victory over it.

Six months later, the man is bored one night. He goes to the pub and gets drunk.

That is a very different situation, and must be viewed very differently than when he sought victory over alcohol he was a slave to by faith I Christ.

For we must remember, Paul tells us we are made alive with Christ even when we are dead in transgressions. The transgressions get dealt with by faith I Christ, not in order to receive Christ

 

[stuart lawrence]

I think as I mentioned that the Sacraments need to be discussed separately.

We do have something of a difference, but I think it is not what you are thinking? I believe I see your concern now though.

Our righteousness is purely in Christ, certainly. Our salvation is purely through Him, and NOT of anything we do. We cannot save ourselves, nor "contribute materially" to our salvation.

But there is a difference in how we would describe salvation.

This comes, I think, from a change that happened in Catholicism, and because all Protestants have their beginnings there, in general most have inherited the particular focus.

I'm guessing that your primary thoughts about salvation have to do with a courtroom type focus? All about what laws we have broken, what sins we have committed, and whether the penalty has been paid (or more accurately, if we ACCEPT that payment made on our behalf) - or not. Please correct me if I'm wrongly understanding you? But that's pretty much how all Protestants seem to see things, and as far as I can tell with their highly developed theology if mortal sins, venial sins, penance, and purgatory - I'm guessing Catholics lean pretty strongly that way too.

And in a sense, I do agree with what you've said. It's not that I would disagree that this dynamic exists. Christ DID die for our salvation.

But where I think we would differ, and I hope you'll understand me here and not think I'm denying our righteousness through Christ - what I think separates us is that in your thinking, I'm guessing that's the "whole pie". Where in the thinking of the early Church, as in Orthodoxy today, it's a large slice of the total pie.

Now, please don't assume I'm "adding works righteousness" because that seems to be the immediate assumption - "faith vs. works". But that's NOT what I'm talking about.

Another large slice of the pie is Christ's victory over death. Not ONLY did He come to redeem us from our sins, but He ALSO came to reverse the curse of death that fell on us through our separation from God, who is the source of life. That is hugely important, and is all over Scripture as well.

And another large slice is the healing of our natures, the actual restoration of the image of God in us, as we were created to become. We will be like Christ, not covered over and made to look kind of like Him, not just seen through the lens of Christ, but actually healed of the results of sin and made like Him.

I doubt you would deny that Christ defeats death, or that we will become like Him. It's just that it has become pushed aside in favor of legal justification, and essentially lost or ignored in many theologies.

But in the Orthodox Church, we joyously embrace ALL of this - not only forgiveness of sins, but eternal life and actually being co-heirs with Christ.

When I started to focus on how MUCH God is granting us in our redemption through Christ, I became that much more thankful.

It's not just a "get out of hell free" card. It's eternal life, and ever increasing from glory to glory, in the presence of and communion with God.

Your post actually goes to the heart of the problem. I certainly agree, the christian is not just acquitted, they are to be confirmed to the likeness of Christ. Though I would add. No human will ever attain a sinless state as Was the case for Christ when he walked This earth.
Here's the problem, as I see it.
Scripturally speaking, a christian is to accept faith In Christ, not observing the law is their righteousness before God, from first to last, the whole of their Christian life. And that Is what Paul relentlessly stresses.
If you observe the law, you do not commit sin.
Yet, you have a righteousness before God apart from observing the law. Seems ridiculous at first glance doesn't it?

Now, at the same Time you have a righteousness before God apart from observing the law, one of faith in Christ, you are not expected to wallow in the worst if sins all your life. Paul was clear that could not be. He demanded righteous living

So, how do you square the two? How did Paul square them? He must have done.
You see, if you say to yourself:

I must become christlike, the christian is called to live a holy life, therefore i cannot continue to sin, if I want to be a christian

You have placed yourself back under a righteousness of observing the law, for sin is transgression of the law.

So what would you say is the answer, for In my view we have now reached the core/ heart of the problem?

 

[stuart lawrence]

The Sacraments seem to be a side issue to this particular discussion that have caused confusion. Clearly you don't regard them in the same way, so I think consideration of them clouds the issue.

If you do wish to discuss them, it might be best in a separate thread (and maybe only after we are done here). I'm up for it (though no expert), but the entanglement seems to have made this discussion difficult to sort out.

I would agree, this should be the main discussion, not sacraments

 

[~Anastasia~]

There are two types of sin in my view. And they must be viewed very differently.

IE

An alcoholic becomes a christian, they have been enslaved by alcohol for thirty years. Some sin immediately ceases upon conversion, other sin that has deeply entangled itself in us takes time to be delivered from.
The christian has to cross over from being a slave to sin when they come to Christ, into a slave of righteousness leading to holiness( rom ch6) but it takes time.
The christian seeks this justification of their christianity by faith In Christ( gal2:16&17)

So the alcoholic hates his drinking, he is desperate to be free of it, and trusts Christ to deliver him from it. Though he drink far too much, he stands In a righteousness of faith in Christ, trusting him for victory over the alcohol.
Lets say after a month he is delivered from alcohol, he is no longer its slave. He sinned during that month concerning alcohol, yet at the same Time he was being led of the holy spirit In the truth of the Gospel message as to how to have victory over it.

Six months later, the man is bored one night. He goes to the pub and gets drunk.

That is a very different situation, and must be viewed very differently than when he sought victory over alcohol he was a slave to by faith I Christ.

For we must remember, Paul tells us we are made alive with Christ even when we are dead in transgressions. The transgressions get dealt with by faith I Christ, not in order to receive Christ

I do agree that these two types of sin are different.

I'm not sure how much more there is to say about that, so ... I think we are doing good.

At least in understanding each other.

In a way, I have thought if it (and I will be clear this is my own mind thinking, not Orthodox teaching, though for all I know, the Church MAY agree ... or may not or may not have a position) ....

But my way of thinking is something like there are sins of what we DO and sins of what we ARE.

Keeping in mind, please, that I have a broader definition of sin (hamartia) ... not ONLY "transgressing the law" but also including all of "missing the mark". And since the "mark" we aim for is no less than being like Christ Himself, we will ALWAYS fall short of that goal, in ways large or small.

Even if we act as Christ would have done in a particular situation, we may not do so with exactly His motives. Or even if we do so with His motives, some stray thought may also influence our attitude the tiniest bit.

Now that thought, if it is only a temptation, is not, strictly speaking, a "sin" as in something that needs to be confessed before God for forgiveness.

But it STILL shows us that we continue to fall short of Christ, no matter how close we might come, and teaches us that our only proper attitude is one of humility, realizing that no matter how much "good" we might happen to do in this situation or that one (remembering that we do "good" ONLY by the grace of God anyway) - that we still fall short of Christ Himself, and always will.

This is how we can get the understanding in the heart that we have NO righteousness of our own. No matter how close, to the glory of God, we might come, it is only by His power and it is STILL not the righteousness of Christ, which you are right, in this life, we do not expect to achieve. We expect to struggle with temptations and shortcomings all of our lives, until at last we find ourselves in the Presence of God at the end of this earthly life.

So we will never be righteous in ourselves.

Sidetracked a bit there, sorry, but I hope that made sense. Oh, and the rest IS Orthodox theology - I'm just not sure about the part where I said I look at sins of how we are, and what we do.

Your alcoholic's drinking while he is still an alcoholic might be considered how he IS, since he can't yet overcome the flesh and not drink (I'm guessing here, since I've never been in that position and have no experience) ... just as I would also say there are things about us that make us fall short of Christ all our lives, and that is who we ARE, not sins we choose to commit.

But they can still grieve someone who wants to be as Christlike as possible. Though on the other hand, remember pages back, I said that we can't go getting all surprised that we are not perfectly sinless, because that would be pride, as though we could be.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Your post actually goes to the heart of the problem. I certainly agree, the christian is not just acquitted, they are to be confirmed to the likeness of Christ. Though I would add. No human will ever attain a sinless state as Was the case for Christ when he walked This earth.
Here's the problem, as I see it.
Scripturally speaking, a christian is to accept faith In Christ, not observing the law is their righteousness before God, from first to last, the whole of their Christian life. And that Is what Paul relentlessly stresses.
If you observe the law, you do not commit sin.
Yet, you have a righteousness before God apart from observing the law. Seems ridiculous at first glance doesn't it?

Now, at the same Time you have a righteousness before God apart from observing the law, one of faith in Christ, you are not expected to wallow in the worst if sins all your life. Paul was clear that could not be. He demanded righteous living

So, how do you square the two? How did Paul square them? He must have done.
You see, if you say to yourself:

I must become christlike, the christian is called to live a holy life, therefore i cannot continue to sin, if I want to be a christian

You have placed yourself back under a righteousness of observing the law, for sin is transgression of the law.

So what would you say is the answer, for In my view we have now reached the core/ heart of the problem?

Articulating an answer is not easy here, because I guess I don't see a problem.

It is not "the law" that I concern myself with, per se, but imitating Christ. However, the law (properly understood) can be instructive in doing this.

But at the same time, it is completely faith in Christ and the mercy of God in which we hope, not trusting our own "righteousness" (which is not the true and perfect righteousness of Christ, and cannot be).

The problem would come if we expected God to save us because of our works? But - we simply don't. We would be lost if that were the case. There is none perfectly righteous.

I do understand that logically it IS a paradox on the surface, but I guess it isn't for me, so I'm sorry, but I am having trouble answering your question beyond that.


Not only that, but babies, who have never sinned, can still die. They have no sin to "pay for" nor do they need forgiveness for their thoughts or actions, but ... as human persons, they are born under the same curse of death which is the separation of mankind from God - the very source of life. Even if they don't need "forgiveness" they STILL need to have death defeated so that they, too, may share in the resurrection.

So even if we could somehow be born and live perfectly sinless lives (which we can't), we would still die because we are human. We would still need to be saved from the curse of death, because all of mankind has inherited that. (We do not teach that we inherit the guilt of Adam's sin as our own personal guilt, but it is clear that all mankind has inherited the curse of death.) This is one reason I pointed out that there is more to the Atonement than just forgiveness.

But if we are old enough to even think about these things, we are old enough to need BOTH forgiveness and saving from the curse of death.

But as far as our "righteousness" ... it merits nothing. We don't believe that. (In some sense, it may be that Western Catholics do.) So there is no problem. Simply we cannot trust in our own righteousness, because we really have none.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Ah, reading over this, I realize there is another nuance that I have missed. And if we seem to understand one another, my clumsiness in explaining this one might risk upsetting everything. But I will try, because without it, I fear I present an incomplete picture.

What we DO, and what we think, say, etc. DOES have a bearing, perhaps, on our salvation. But NOT in the sense that we can earn anything. Rather, think about this: it has a bearing on our faith, which we depend on to save us.

What is LIVING faith, saving faith? It is not simple mental assent. It is not only fearing God. The demons believe, and tremble. They do not "have faith in Christ".

James said that faith without works is dead. So therefore, can it make sense that the way we live has a bearing on our faith, quickens it, makes it alive?

I think that is part.

The other part is this. I don't think this would or could actually happen to this extreme, but it is an illustration of a point. If a person had faith in Christ, but then set out to act against it, indulging the flesh, satisfying his whims, living in an ungodly way, that person is becoming ever more twisted in sin, further perverting his very nature and turning away from God. In the end, when He stands before God, how will such a one experience God? He will not love to be in His presence, but will find it torture. Those who work darkness avoid the Light.

I think I will leave it at that.

Our works do not save us, but the way we choose to live forms us. And if we form ourselves to be like demons, we are not going to enjoy the presence of God when we encounter it.

 

[stuart lawrence]

I do agree that these two types of sin are different.

I'm not sure how much more there is to say about that, so ... I think we are doing good.

At least in understanding each other.

In a way, I have thought if it (and I will be clear this is my own mind thinking, not Orthodox teaching, though for all I know, the Church MAY agree ... or may not or may not have a position) ....

But my way of thinking is something like there are sins of what we DO and sins of what we ARE.

Keeping in mind, please, that I have a broader definition of sin (hamartia) ... not ONLY "transgressing the law" but also including all of "missing the mark". And since the "mark" we aim for is no less than being like Christ Himself, we will ALWAYS fall short of that goal, in ways large or small.

Even if we act as Christ would have done in a particular situation, we may not do so with exactly His motives. Or even if we do so with His motives, some stray thought may also influence our attitude the tiniest bit.

Now that thought, if it is only a temptation, is not, strictly speaking, a "sin" as in something that needs to be confessed before God for forgiveness.

But it STILL shows us that we continue to fall short of Christ, no matter how close we might come, and teaches us that our only proper attitude is one of humility, realizing that no matter how much "good" we might happen to do in this situation or that one (remembering that we do "good" ONLY by the grace of God anyway) - that we still fall short of Christ Himself, and always will.

This is how we can get the understanding in the heart that we have NO righteousness of our own. No matter how close, to the glory of God, we might come, it is only by His power and it is STILL not the righteousness of Christ, which you are right, in this life, we do not expect to achieve. We expect to struggle with temptations and shortcomings all of our lives, until at last we find ourselves in the Presence of God at the end of this earthly life.

So we will never be righteous in ourselves.

Sidetracked a bit there, sorry, but I hope that made sense. Oh, and the rest IS Orthodox theology - I'm just not sure about the part where I said I look at sins of how we are, and what we do.

Your alcoholic's drinking while he is still an alcoholic might be considered how he IS, since he can't yet overcome the flesh and not drink (I'm guessing here, since I've never been in that position and have no experience) ... just as I would also say there are things about us that make us fall short of Christ all our lives, and that is who we ARE, not sins we choose to commit.

But they can still grieve someone who wants to be as Christlike as possible. Though on the other hand, remember pages back, I said that we can't go getting all surprised that we are not perfectly sinless, because that would be pride, as though we could be.

Yes, whichever way you look at it, we cant attain to sinless perfection and that is the only pass mark of being TRULY righteous where sin us concerned, 100% perfect obedience ( gal3:10&11)

I understand what you mean as to a broader understanding of sin, though as Paul mainly, related sin to the law and John defined sin as transgression of the law, I do mainly see it in those terms.
I also wonder if commandments dont cover most failings in our lives, but some may not appreciate this.
When I was young, I thought. Thou shalt not covet for example only referred to covering material goods of another. IE their house or car. But of course, it covers so much more than that.
Some( quite a lot actually) believe it I not so hard to obey the TC, yet Paul termed those commands, the letter that kills, the ministry of death and condemnation. Which would make one believe he understood the full requirement of obeying those particular commands, whereas many others might not.

You seem to fully embrace the fact, observing the law cannot make you righteous. A lot of EO seem not to believe that way. However, in all denominations I have come across, some accept grace and some do not.
Though I think all Lutherans probably would!

 

[~Anastasia~]

My understanding has developed directly under studying in the Orthodox Church.

HOWEVER I will say that at first, there certainly appeared to be two different thoughts going on, and I had to learn how they worked together in order to reach the understanding I have so far. It wasn't immediately apparent to me, which I think is why newcomers are strongly discouraged from studying too deeply into monastic writings at first.

Anyway.

I would agree that Commandments do cover to a very great degree all kinds of shortcomings. Maybe, really, all of them, especially when you simply it to include "love the Lord your God with all of your heart, mind, soul, and strength" ... which if you were to REALLY apply it means that anything at all done or thought that was not 100% focused on loving God is a sin. And to never, ever miss that for a moment is completely impossible - it is difficult to come close to fully managing it in even little things.

Which is one reason I say that we will always fall short, without any hope of doing otherwise, while in this life.

The bar is impossibly high. Fortunately, it's just pointing the way for how to conduct ourselves ideally, not something we must master in order in order to be saved, since by this measure would no flesh be saved.

 

[stuart lawrence]

My understanding has developed directly under studying in the Orthodox Church.

HOWEVER I will say that at first, there certainly appeared to be two different thoughts going on, and I had to learn how they worked together in order to reach the understanding I have so far. It wasn't immediately apparent to me, which I think is why newcomers are strongly discouraged from studying too deeply into monastic writings at first.

Anyway.

I would agree that Commandments do cover to a very great degree all kinds of shortcomings. Maybe, really, all of them, especially when you simply it to include "love the Lord your God with all of your heart, mind, soul, and strength" ... which if you were to REALLY apply it means that anything at all done or thought that was not 100% focused on loving God is a sin. And to never, ever miss that for a moment is completely impossible - it is difficult to fully manage in even little things.

Which is one reason I say that we will always fall short, without any hope of doing otherwise, while in this life.

The bar is impossibly high. Fortunately, it's just pointing the way for how to conduct ourselves ideally, not something we must master in order in order to be saved, since by this measure would no flesh be saved.

Please don't take offence at me saying some EO appear to embrace grace more than others.
I would only class myself as Christian, not of a particular denomination. I fully agree with you. In ALL denominations there are people half hearted I you like about God, and others not so.
As I may have told you. In my youth I went to a denomination That believed it was the only true fist century church, and stood full square on the bible. I fully believed them at the time. However, when i fully read the NT for myself I was stunned, much of what was written in it concerning the gospel message I had never heard preached from the pulpit.
So I am not one who believes there is any set denomination that has a monopoly on truth preached. Once yes, not since.

 

[stuart lawrence]

My understanding has developed directly under studying in the Orthodox Church.

HOWEVER I will say that at first, there certainly appeared to be two different thoughts going on, and I had to learn how they worked together in order to reach the understanding I have so far. It wasn't immediately apparent to me, which I think is why newcomers are strongly discouraged from studying too deeply into monastic writings at first.

Anyway.

I would agree that Commandments do cover to a very great degree all kinds of shortcomings. Maybe, really, all of them, especially when you simply it to include "love the Lord your God with all of your heart, mind, soul, and strength" ... which if you were to REALLY apply it means that anything at all done or thought that was not 100% focused on loving God is a sin. And to never, ever miss that for a moment is completely impossible - it is difficult to come close to fully managing it in even little things.

Which is one reason I say that we will always fall short, without any hope of doing otherwise, while in this life.

The bar is impossibly high. Fortunately, it's just pointing the way for how to conduct ourselves ideally, not something we must master in order in order to be saved, since by this measure would no flesh be saved.

I find myself in agreement with your post
BTW

 

[stuart lawrence]

Ah, reading over this, I realize there is another nuance that I have missed. And if we seem to understand one another, my clumsiness in explaining this one might risk upsetting everything. But I will try, because without it, I fear I present an incomplete picture.

What we DO, and what we think, say, etc. DOES have a bearing, perhaps, on our salvation. But NOT in the sense that we can earn anything. Rather, think about this: it has a bearing on our faith, which we depend on to save us.

What is LIVING faith, saving faith? It is not simple mental assent. It is not only fearing God. The demons believe, and tremble. They do not "have faith in Christ".

James said that faith without works is dead. So therefore, can it make sense that the way we live has a bearing on our faith, quickens it, makes it alive?

I think that is part.

The other part is this. I don't think this would or could actually happen to this extreme, but it is an illustration of a point. If a person had faith in Christ, but then set out to act against it, indulging the flesh, satisfying his whims, living in an ungodly way, that person is becoming ever more twisted in sin, further perverting his very nature and turning away from God. In the end, when He stands before God, how will such a one experience God? He will not love to be in His presence, but will find it torture. Those who work darkness avoid the Light.

I think I will leave it at that.

Our works do not save us, but the way we choose to live forms us. And if we form ourselves to be like demons, we are not going to enjoy the presence of God when we encounter it.

I will speak from personal experience.
And i know God has no favourites. So I'm sure I am no special case.
I have let God down much in my life. I did not take up the particular cross given to me, I was selfish, I was wrong.
Did this mean Christ disowned me?

No!
If we are faithless, he remains faithful for he cannot disown himself
2tim2:13

So did I just get away with being selfish? Were there no reprocussions at all.
Yes there were. While I did what I wanted I was miserable, not happy. Nothing succeeded in my life, for i was not going what God wanted me to do.
I believe it comes down to whether you truly have been born again. A person who from the outset I somewhat indifferent about God, just wants to go through the motions, may not have such a conscience as i had. They may simply of made excuses for their refusal to do what they should, I could never do that.
I hope that makes sense.
What I do know is this. If you have truly been born again, and the law God desires you to keep us within you, it is utterly impossible to use grace as a licence to sin. It cannot be done.

The only time in your life you have peace and happiness believing faith in Christ is your righteousness before God is when you follow the path of being a work in progress.
Step outside of that path, and your peace, happiness starts to diminish, and so does your ability to look to Christ, believing faith I him is your righteousness.

It is a full proof covenant

Once again, I hope what i have written makes sense to you