EO Arguments Against Sola Scriptura

[MariaRegina]

CJ,

Canon means rule. So, we have the canon of scripture which is simply a ruling handed down by the Holy Fathers and the Holy Spirit gathered together in a Holy Church Council indicating which books are part of the Holy Scriptures. The Holy Orthodox Church gave us the Holy Bible. It just did not come floating out of Christ's mouth. The New and Old Testaments of the Holy Bible were written by men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and that same All-Holy Spirit directed the Church Fathers to carefully select which books should be in the Holy Bible. Now the Bible that you read is defective in that it lacks certain books so chosen.

A canon usually has an anathema attached to it, so that those who refuse to accept the canon, as the Protestants have done, have incurred an anathema or curse.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

deleted by poster

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

CJ,

Canon means rule. So, we have the canon of scripture which is simply a ruling handed down the Holy Fathers and the Holy Spirit gathered together in a Holy Church Council indicating which books are part of the Holy Scriptures.

Yes, and here's what was posted as the EO position:

How can we argue against the notion that scripture is the rule? That is the meaning of the word canon. Brilliant.

Thus, the rule is Scripture. That IS Sola Scriptura, so he has stated that the EO embraces Sola Scriptura (although he later denied that it is).

Then, he stated this as the EO position:

The canon for the Church is Holy Tradition as we have received it

So, first he said the canon/rule for the Church is Scripture.
Then that it's the Tradition of itself.

I don't think my question is a logical fallacy. I just asked: WHICH IS IT? Is it Scripture as he first said, EO Tradition as he then said, or some combo of the two? Or is it the RCC "three-legged-stool?"



.

 

[MariaRegina]

You keep quoting Rd. Iakovos and he is not here to defend himself.
Could he have stated that sarcastically to show the logical fallacies of your statements?

You did not even look at my post about Holy Tradition which I have adapted from Father Alexander Schmemann, may his memory be eternal.

So I will copy and rephrase it:

Since Holy Scriptures are an honored part of our Holy Tradition, Sola Scripture cannot be valid.

According to Father Alexander Schmemann, Holy Tradition includes:

• The Holy Scriptures. We have the canon of scripture which is simply a ruling handed down by the Holy Fathers and the Holy Spirit gathered together in a Holy Church Council indicating which books are part of the Holy Scriptures. The Holy Orthodox Church gave us the Holy Bible. It just did not come floating out of Christ's mouth. The New and Old Testaments of the Holy Bible were written by men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and that same All-Holy Spirit directed the Church Fathers to carefully select which books should be in the Holy Bible. Now the Bible that you read is defective in that it lacks certain books so chosen. A canon means rule and usually has an anathema attached to it, so that those who refuse to accept the canon, as the Protestants have done, have incurred an anathema or curse.

• The Divine Liturgy, which has been established by Christ Himself;

• Our Holy Services: Vespers, etc. which are derived from the Hebrew Worship and their reading of the psalms and Torah;

• Our Holy Mysteries (Baptism, Chrismation, Holy Confession, Holy Eucharist, Holy Orders, Holy Crowning, Tonsuring of Monastics, Holy Unction, Funeral Service) which were ordained by Christ Himself;

• Our Byzantine Chant which is derived from the Hebrew Temple Worship;

• Our Temple Architecture which comes from the Jewish Temples; (Incidentally several people have said that if you take away the icons in our temples, you can see the similarity between the E.O. Temples and the Jewish Temples.)

• Our Holy Councils especially the Seven Holy Ecumenical Councils are also God-inspired as the First Council was held in Jerusalem as mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles by Luke. This tradition established our Church as a Conciliar Church.
• The symbol of faith, The Nicene Creed.

• The Veneration of Icons was also established by Christ when He imparted His Holy Image on a canvas and gave it to the servant of the King of Ephesus who was cured of his leprosy.

I can be so bold to say that if you continue to attack the Eastern Orthodox Church and her Holy Traditions (which are God-given) then you are crossing the line to becoming Anti-Semitic since the roots of our Holy Traditions are Semitic.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

You keep quoting Rd. Iakovos and he is not here to defend himself.
Could he have stated that sarcastically to show the logical fallacies of your statements?

1. You are the one who charged me with "logical fallacies" and yet HAVE YET to quote me and prove such.

2. I don't know what you are referring to because you keep refusing to say.

3. The context of your accusations was my discussion with an Orthodox poster, Rdr Iakovos. HE stated that the rule/canon in the EO is Scripture. I simply noted the obvious: That IS Sola Scriptura, thus the EO's position is Sola Scriptura. But then he said that the rule/canon in the EO is it's Tradition. Well, if someone says that it IS one thing but then no, it's something else - that suggests a question to ME. Now, if one posted "THE color of my car IS red" it is not illogical to conclud he means the color of is car is red. If he then writes, "NO! THE color of my car IS WHITE!" it's not a logical fallacy to ask, "Which is it? Or is it both?" What is a logical fallacy about that? Now THAT is the context of your remark. So, since you continue to refuse to tell me what anyone posted that is a logical fallacy, my only choice is to suspect it was the context and discussion surrounding your remark and attack.



Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah





.

 

[Yab Yum]

That is another fallacy of logic, CJ.

Repeating a false statement will not make it true.

Hitler tried that too.

Godwin.

 

[PassthePeace1]

CJ, sounds like you are trying to connect SS with EO, in some attempt to validate it as an Apostolic teaching, instead of an innovation of the Reformation. That really doesn't hold water, for reason that MariaRegina was trying to explain.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

CJ, sounds like you are trying to connect SS with EO

NOT AT ALL.

I simply noted what an ORTHODOX poster said is the ORTHODOX position. Frankly, I was very surprised to learn that.


Originally Posted by Rdr Iakovos

How can we argue against the notion that scripture is the rule? That is the meaning of the word canon. Brilliant.
​

Of course, that is Sola Scriptura.

an innovation of the Reformation

Actually, I'd see it as an "innovation" of Moses. When he came down the Mountain with the very first Scripture, that Scripture was noted as normative. He did not point to the Pope in Rome or to the Tradition of any denomination as normative - with or in addition to Scripture.

None of the following quotes are from persons typically associated with the Reformation....


"Let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth." Basil of Caesarea (c. 330 - 379 A.D.)

"In order to leave room for such profitable discussions of difficult questions, there is a distinct boundary line separating all productions subsequent to apostolic times from the authoritative canonical books of the Old and New Testaments. The authority of these books has come down to us from the apostles through the successions of bishops and the extension of the Church, and, from a position of lofty supremacy, claims the submission of every faithful and pious mind....In the innumerable books that have been written latterly we may sometimes find the same truth as in Scripture, butthere is not the same authority. Scripture has a sacredness peculiar to itself." - Augustine (Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, 11:5)


"The holy and inspired Scriptures are fully sufficient for the proclamation of the truth. St. Athanasius (Against the Heathen, I:3)

"Regarding the things I say, I should supply even the proofs, so I will not seem to rely on my own opinions, but rather, prove them with Scripture, so that the matter will remain certain and steadfast." St. John Chrysostom (Homily 8 On Repentance and the Church, p. 118, vol. 96 TFOTC)

"Let the inspired Scriptures then be our umpire, and the vote of truth will be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." St. Gregory of Nyssa (On the Holy Trinity, NPNF, p. 327).

"We are not entitled to such license, I mean that of affirming what we please; we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings." St. Gregory of Nyssa (On the Soul and the Resurrection NPNF II, V:439)

"What is the mark of a faithful soul? To be in these dispositions of full acceptance on the authority of the words of Scripture, not venturing to reject anything nor making additions. For, if ‘all that is not of faith is sin' as the Apostle says, and ‘faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God,' everything outside Holy Scripture, not being of faith, is sin." Basil the Great (The Morals, p. 204, vol 9 TFOTC).

"We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture." St. Basil the Great (On the Holy Spirit, Chapter 7, par. 16)

For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless you receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures. St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures, IV:17, in NPNF, Volume VII, p. 23.)

Neither dare one agree with catholic bishops if by chance they err in anything, but the result that their opinion is against the canonical Scriptures of God. St. Augustine (De unitate ecclesiae, chp. 10)






.

 

[MariaRegina]

CJ, Please ask Iakovos to explain his statement, and stop repeating it as truth.

I honestly think that Iakovos was just trying to show that your argument is illogical. He was not making a truth proposition.

By constantly repeating his one statement and taking it out of context, you are repeating a statement that is not true and using it for your purposes to prove something that is not true. Hence, that is also an illogical fallacy.

 

[MariaRegina]

How can we argue against the notion that scripture is the rule?

The notion = Sola Scripture

Iakovos is making a statement that we cannot argue AGAINST a notion.

Logically, one cannot argue AGAINST a statement.

 

[Blackknight]

Keep in mind that most of us are just lay men and we are not infallible. My opinion is not necessarily the opinion of the church.

Scripture does have a very important role in Orthodoxy but it is in the context of the church and patristic tradition, without that it just doesn't make any sense and leads to heresies.

 

[Yab Yum]

Logically, one cannot argue AGAINST a statement.

Oh yes you can.



YouTube - Argument Clinic

 

[lionroar0]

Oh yes you can.



YouTube - Argument Clinic

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Oh yes you can.



YouTube - Argument Clinic

Hmmm. Looks like a typical SDA vs Catholic debate

 

[MariaRegina]

CJ, you stated:

• "I'm glad to hear the EO rather embraces the Canon of Scripture as the canon for the church. That IS Sola Scriptura. Interesting you call it, "Brilliant."

However, this is what Rd. Iakavos originally stated:

• "Weak arguments," indeed. How can we argue against the notion that scripture is the rule? That is the meaning of the word canon. So you have come around to the notion that canon is canon. Brilliant.

• Thanks for the combination strawman and ad hominem with a side order of poisoning the well, CJ- we can always count on you for offensive and verbose logical fallacies.[/quote]

NOTE: No where does Iakovos state that the E.O. believe in Sola Scriptura. Instead, Iakovos states that some Protestants engage in circular reasoning -- another logical fallacy.
​

The canon of scripture is beyond brilliant, it's God-breathed. The canon for the Church is Holy Tradition as we have received it- including the measure of that which shall be called scripture. That you reject portions of scripture, as well as the remaining canon- well, that's why you're a cafeteria Lutheran.

The canon of scripture refers to the Holy Fathers' decision with the Holy Spirit to establish which books were canonical in the Bible. This Church Canon had penalties attached to it. Those who did not accept the Holy Canon establishing the books of the Holy Bible were called anathema.

The Holy Tradition of the EO Church includes all the Church Canons established in Holy Councils. Refusing to accept the complete Holy Canons makes one anathema.

Does that make sense?

Edit: One either accepts the entire Holy Tradition of the Holy Orthodox Church or one accept Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura is a novel belief that was not held by the Ancient Christians. It is a new doctrine that is anathema to the Holy Canons.

 

[sunlover1]

I dunno, just seeing the disunity in the Protestant world, and the various heresies floating around, there doesn't seem to be much point in arguing against Sola Scriptura... The problems with that doctrine are self-evident.

Hi Mike!
I can understand that you'd believe this but if you think about it a bit,
SS isnt the culprit
If Jesus were standing before this motley crew (all of us posting on this thread)
we would all hear the same words but we would all come away with a different
opinion... even if only slightly different. And certainly same holds true with
writings by early church fathers etc.

The condition of our heart is the variable!
WHILE SEEING, THEY MAY SEE AND NOT PERCEIVE,
AND WHILE HEARING, THEY MAY HEAR AND NOT UNDERSTAND
(fat hearts)

Besides, it's not as if the Orthodox Church takes scripture lightly.

super.

We read more of it in our services than any other Christian group

,
Cool. not a proven fact, naturally, but cool.

Any Orthodox Church has been teaching the same thing consistently nearly 2000 years by their methods. Now whether people agree with it or not is a different story.

Certainly.
Hi Yeznik. Good to see you!

But, it has a method of teaching which is consistently traceable from the beginning of the Church. The key factor is that any Orthodox Church uses Scripture in a consistent method that produces consistent results.

and that's great for ya. My church teaches right from Scripture and that works great
for us. You gotta know i love that .

Comparatively, the process or formula of Sola Scriptura, as logical and methodical, as it claims to be, consistently produces different results using the exact same methodology. Not only does it produce different results but produces contrary results to itself as a process.

SS doesnt produce contrary results (being that SS means one relys on Scripture as
a tool to measure doctrine against). I think you're talking about different interpretations,
which is not surprising in that we can even misunderstand our priest or pastor
whos explaining said Scripture.
There IS no surefire method of making men understand perfectly.

I can be so bold to say that if you continue to attack the Eastern Orthodox Church and her Holy Services (which are part of our Holy Tradition) then you are crossing the line to becoming Anti-Semitic since our roots are Semitic.

I can see why you'd dislike the thread, but it seemed he was defending his practice
of SS against someone who was dissing it.
My remedy would be that those who embrace SS be blessed
and those who don't care to embrace SS, be blessed too.
Oneness is the goal, not my church is badder than your church.


In CHRIST,
sunlover

.

 

[MariaRegina]

The Holy Bible is used for comforting, correcting, guiding, and praying, and is our sacred Tradition.

Just because we hold to our Holy Tradition which accepts the Seven Ecumenical Councils, the rule of bishops, the liturgy and prayer services, the Holy Mysteries, Holy Icons, and Holy Architecture does not mean that we dishonor the Bible, because the Holy Bible is our most precious treasure and is part of our Holy Tradition.

Our Church safeguarded the Holy Bible during the 300 year persecution by the Romans. Thousands of Christians were burned on stakes, crucified on crosses, tossed to the lions, and tortured by various methods, but they did not reveal the hiding places where the Bible, Gospels, and Epistles were guarded. These holy martyrs offered their lives for what Protestants enjoy today.

So, we Orthodox Christians honor the Holy Scriptures and pray them daily as part of our rule of prayer. In fact, the Jesus Prayer comes from the Bible: Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us and save us.

 

[Yeznik]

Hi Mike!
I can understand that you'd believe this but if you think about it a bit,
SS isnt the culprit
If Jesus were standing before this motley crew (all of us posting on this thread)
we would all hear the same words but we would all come away with a different
opinion... even if only slightly different. And certainly same holds true with
writings by early church fathers etc.

The condition of our heart is the variable!
WHILE SEEING, THEY MAY SEE AND NOT PERCEIVE,
AND WHILE HEARING, THEY MAY HEAR AND NOT UNDERSTAND
(fat hearts)


super.
,
Cool. not a proven fact, naturally, but cool.


[/color]Certainly.
Hi Yeznik. Good to see you!


and that's great for ya. My church teaches right from Scripture and that works great
for us. You gotta know i love that .



SS doesnt produce contrary results (being that SS means one relys on Scripture as
a tool to measure doctrine against). I think you're talking about different interpretations,
which is not surprising in that we can even misunderstand our priest or pastor
whos explaining said Scripture.
There IS no surefire method of making men understand perfectly.


I can see why you'd dislike the thread, but it seemed he was defending his practice
of SS against someone who was dissing it.
My remedy would be that those who embrace SS be blessed
and those who don't care to embrace SS, be blessed too.
Oneness is the goal, not my church is badder than your church.


In CHRIST,
sunlover

.

Hello sunlover1,

It is good to see you too. Please understand that I am not stating your church or anybody else’s church doesn’t teach from the Scriptures, what I am stating is the difference in the methodology used to and the context of how they are applied. What I am trying to point out is that there are two rules of measure being used, the one that the Orthodox uses and the one that Protestantism uses. As you, CJ and LLOJ have provided is that there are different ways that SS is used and applied. It is natural when using two different methodologies that will produce two different results. So what needed to be studied are the methodologies, and not the interpretations produced by the methodologies.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that we can misunderstand priests and pastors when they are explaining Scripture but the question is what “tools” should be used when trying to get a better understanding of what priest or pastor was talking about. The most sensible tool is to look at the writings of the teachers of Scriptures from the inception of the Church till today. It is very important to have a basis of the understanding of Scripture from a historical perspective as well. Why? Because what the whole Christian world believes and teaches should be consistent, and unfortunately SS falls short of that consistency.

Let me give you another example if a priest from Jerusalem has a conversation with a priest in Serbia about Saint Mary, even though they are worlds apart, linguistically, nationally and ethnically, the Orthodox method has produced a consistent understand of Scripture that will allow them to communicate. Comparatively, there can be two Protestant churches in the same country; using the same language sitting right across the street from each other but will have different teachings about Scripture, possibly contradictory to each other, by the SS method.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hello sunlover,

It is good to see you too. Please understand that I am not stating your church or anybody else’s church doesn’t teach from the Scriptures, what I am stating is the difference in the methodology used to and the context of how they are applied. What I am trying to point out is that there are two rules of measure being used, the one that the Orthodox uses and the one that Protestantism uses. As you, CJ and LLOJ have provided is that there are different ways that SS is used and applied. It is natural when using two different methodologies that will produce two different results. So what needed to be studied are the methodologies, and not the interpretations produced by the methodologies.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that we can misunderstand priests and pastors when they are explaining Scripture but the question is what “tools” should be used when trying to get a better understanding of what priest or pastor was talking about. The most sensible tool is to look at the writings of the teachers of Scriptures from the inception of the Church till today. It is very important to have a basis of the understanding of Scripture from a historical perspective as well. Why? Because what the whole Christian world believes and teaches should be consistent, and unfortunately SS falls short of that consistency.

Let me give you another example if a priest from Jerusalem has a conversation with a priest in Serbia about Saint Mary, even though they are worlds apart, linguistically, nationally and ethnically, the Orthodox method has produced a consistent understand of Scripture that will allow them to communicate. Comparatively, there can be two Protestant churches in the same country; using the same language sitting right across the street from each other but will have different teachings about Scripture, possibly contradictory to each other, by the SS method.

Ahhh. Those are the ones that give the rest of us Sola/Solo Scripturists a bad Rep

 

[Yeznik]

Ahhh. Those are the ones that give the rest of us Sola/Solo Scripturists a bad Rep

I guess there is a new sheriff in town and his name is LittleLambofJesus.