From Where do the RCC and the EOC get the Authority they claim for themselves?

[LittleLambofJesus]

After you expend effort correcting me as to how CJ wasn't really making loaded statements, you come up with this gem.

Why do Protestants and satanists do this? (Entirely valid question since I once knew a satanist who asked a loaded question.)

Cwafty devil.........

Genesis 3:1 And the nachash becomes crafty from all of life of the field which YHWH 'Elohiym made. And he is saying to the woman "indeed! that 'Elohiym says 'not thou shall eat from any of tree of the garden'"?
2 And the woman is saying to the nachash "from fruit of tree of the garden we are eating,
3 but from fruit of the tree which in midst of the garden 'Elohiym says 'not thou shall eat from him, and not thou shall touch in him, lest thou shall die'".
4 And the nachash is saying to the woman "not to die thou shall die".

 

[Gwenyfur]

Gwenyfur,

Can you recommend any good links? I live in a rural area and don't often get to book stores. I guess I could order them off the internet. But, I'm more likely to read up on internet sources if good ones are available.

Rainbow Books


Available to read online or download as PDF for free

They're good for basic knowledge, and usually the first offered to read by my Priest.

I hope they answer your questions, and help bring a more open understanding

 

[nestoj]

EOC claim what authority exactly?
1. We don't place our Bishops over anybody.
2. We don't judge anyone's faith, salvation...etc, (we actually don't even get into doubting) except our own.

The only authority we have is the one that the others already give us (like the Ecumenical Councils - their authority is given not demanded or pre-set).

We also find a direct link with the first Christians and with Christ in spiritual and physical way - in the visible spirit of Christ's teaching, bible, faith, teachings of those before us, testimonies of people glorified by God, praxis, places, churches (most often just the foundations remain)...but above all in the Church (through her survival against all ods, through well known ordination by laying hands which we can trace to Pantecost, through the Liturgy - which for us transcends reality as humans are able to perceive it and joins Heaven and Earth, miracles of God, and the above-emotional and above-intelectual union with God (connected to the Liturgy)....). Thing is - we dont have to abstrach anything from the Bible (not even the names of places) as less important - it's all equaly well tied to the EOC. Another thing is - what I've written is a drop in a sea of what there is - and it's all inteconnected...all points one to another. That's what we know of our Church. Knowing this, we are ordered by God to testify the truth and that's what we are doing - we testify what we believe to be the truth.

In other words - we know who we are. Also - we don't judge who others are - that's for God and themeselves to say.

PS. If all this is non-understandable it's because I have a tough time explaining it with words (especially English). It actually is quite experiential.

PSS. Can somebody answer, what did Christ do in the desert for 40 days? It's not bad to remind ourselves from time to time.


God helps

 

[calluna]

EOC claim what authority exactly?

To teach spiritual truth. This has been mentioned before, though there is so much extraneous matter in this thread that it's no surprise you can't find it.

 

[nestoj]

To teach spiritual truth. This has been mentioned before, though there is so much extraneous matter in this thread that it's no surprise you can't find it.

Don't we?

Edit: The largest part of my previous post deals with the OP - those are the reasons I believe the EOC teaches the truth.

 

[Yarddog]

.




...from the same place the LDS does. Themselves.




.

Just like the Lutherans as well.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

PSS. Can somebody answer, what did Christ do in the desert for 40 days? It's not bad to remind ourselves from time to time.


God helps

Perhaps it was akin to Ezekiel having to lie on one side for 40 days to bear the iniquity of the house of "judah". After all, Jesus was of the Tribe/Nation of Judah....

Ezekiel 4:6 And when thou hast ended these, then shalt thou lie on thy right side a second time and shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days, one day for each year have I appointed thee.

 

[nestoj]

Perhaps it was akin to Ezekiel having to lie on one side for 40 days to bear the iniquity of the house of "judah". After all, Jesus was of the Tribe/Nation of Judah....

Ezekiel 4:6 And when thou hast ended these, then shalt thou lie on thy right side a second time and shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days, one day for each year have I appointed thee.

I don't remember Him lying on the right side in order to "bear the iniquity of the house of Judah". He bear the iniquity of the rest of us on the cross - that should include the house of Judah.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I don't remember Him lying on the right side in order to "bear the iniquity of the house of Judah". He bear the iniquity of the rest of us on the cross - that should include the house of Judah.

Well Israel and Judah were divided after Solomon and the important part about Judah was they had the priestly tribe of Levi and of course YHWH put away the house of Israel in the OT.

Ezekiel 4:4 Thou therefore lie thou on thy left side and lay the iniquity of the house of Israel upon it, during the number of the days which thou shalt lie thereon shalt thou bear their punishment.
5 And I, I give to thee years of depravity of them to number of days three of hundreds and ninety day. And thou bear depravity of house of Israel.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

It probably is referring to the reader positon in his church and Iakovos is a well know name in the Orthodox church....Hence...


We who don't get into latin have no clue what Tu Es Petrus means...What benifit is latin to a believer in Christ?

This is quite correct. The Order of Readers is one of several ancient orders in the Church- Reader (of scripture- few were able to ancient times), Doorkeepers, Exorcists, Confessors...
I bear the title as a sign of humility: In the Orthodox Church, an 8 year old can be a Reader.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

After you expend effort correcting me as to how CJ wasn't really making loaded statements, you come up with this gem.

Why do Protestants and satanists do this? (Entirely valid question since I once knew a satanist who asked a loaded question.)

Perhaps Albion really believes that CJ has no intent to impune? So this is his way of saying, to paraphrase his comments as he paraphrased the OP "CJ wouldn't put you down, but I'm more than happy to" or "CJ was making the kind of genuine comparison I don't waste time with- I get right to the condescension."

Something like that.

 

[racer]

[/size]
Several dozens of polemical responses- yeah, I'll get right on that

I didn't ask for each and every example. One or two will suffice. If they are so ingrained in your mind and have made such an impression on you, it should be really simple.

Sure it is- our answers are characterized as abundantly simple, by those who profer a simple answer: "We get ours from the bible."

From what I have discerned/gleened from this thread, the Orthodox have very few differences that those who say "We get ours from the bible." Except for the fact anyone has said from where they actually do get it, that is barring the assertion--Jesus Christ. As you said yourself we can all make this assertion, but by what VEHICLE did we obtain this information (that the authority comes from Jesus). I learned that first from Sunday school and preachers (before I actually read Scripture), but to the best of my knowledge each preacher I remember held a Bible in his hand (or laid in on his podium) and preached from that.

Yes, all authority for Christianity comes from Christ--but how do we know that? That is the ultimate question.

Apparently you missed my answer. It's there, if you care to "reread it."

Yes, I should have noted after your comment that went something like "so freakin' what" or "who freakin' cares," (I can't actually remember which) you did go on to briefly address the question. Thank you.

Sure, I could do that- but I haven't- and here we are.

Then welcome to the discussion, and I will do my best to be a bit more interesting without appearing to be so insulting.

I read it in the bible- the parts that some haven't highlighted in yellow.

To clarify your answer (no fault of yours), are you saying your read that Jesus Christ gave authority to your Church in the Bible or are you saying that you read your Church has the authority it claims in the Bible.

Either way, now I will go one question further. How do you know that the Bible is right? Why do you as an Orthodox Christian accept the Truth of the Bible?

Gotta go for now!

 

[Albion]

Where do the EO and RCC get the authority they claim for themselves?

Isn't this asking--

"HOW do they get the authority from Christ that they think puts them above other churches?"

I think you may be putting your words in the OP's mouth, so-to-speak.

It's possible, Rdr. However, if we don't all figure out what exactly this thread is asking for, we're not going to get anywhere. As it is, more than a couple of people have said that they don't know just what they question is...and I, for one, am not at all sure that it is appropriate to put the EO and the RCC into the same question, as I opined earlier.

 

[Albion]

Perhaps Albion really believes that CJ has no intent to impune? So this is his way of saying, to paraphrase his comments as he paraphrased the OP "CJ wouldn't put you down, but I'm more than happy to" or "CJ was making the kind of genuine comparison I don't waste time with- I get right to the condescension."

Something like that.

I frankly don't understand all the dark speculation on what Cj wrote. He explained on what grounds he was making the comparison. Almost all of us understood it immediately.

So what's the reason for needing to find something to get upset over when it wasn't there? The comparison was reasonable--as he outlined the basis for it. The churches named claim to be uniquely valid; the great majority of Christian churches, however, do not.

He said nothing in that about any other similarity or possible similarity. In fact, I remember that there was somewhere in which he stated that the are not the same in most other ways. Considering all of that, I'm beginning to wonder just why you insist upon making something out of nothing.

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

Getting back to the topic...

Where do the EO and RCC get the authority they claim for themselves?

Jesus Christ

Isn't this asking--

"HOW do they get the authority from Christ that they think puts them above other churches?"

The way we get it from Christ is by Christ giving it to us.

 

[Albion]

[/size]
Jesus Christ

Fine. Every church says that about itself, so it doesn't really answer anything for us.

What I think the OP is trying to get at is why do the RCC, and perhaps the EO, think Christ founded their organizations to the exclusion of all the others and endowed it with a unique validity.

The way we get it from Christ is by Christ giving it to us.

Is that just something to say...or is there some particular reason for concluding that he gave it to you and to no one else? Getting a real answer to this fairly straightforward question shouldn't be like pulling teeth, I wouldn't think.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Themselves.

Just like the Lutherans as well.

Interesting to see that you, as a Catholic, agree with me. You might want to review your Catechism # 87 before you do that again...

Of course, as you know, NO Lutheran denomination claims any spiritual authority. Jerry Kieschnick does not insist that he and he alone is the Vicar of Christ or that it is absolutely essential for salvation that every human creature be subject to him. NO Lutheran denomination claims that Jesus personally founded it or that it is infallible or that it is the sole authoritative interpreter of Scripture and Tradition, or what whenever it's clergy speaks, Jesus is speaking, or that all must accept whatever it says "with docility." I think the remarkable claims of which we are addressing are those made by the RCC and LDS, each by self exclusively for self exclusively.




.

 

[Albion]

Just like the Lutherans as well.

No, Lutherans and almost all the other reformed churches reject that kind of thinking. The rejection, in fact, is a significant point made at the time of the Protestant Reformation and which distinguishes, until our own times, Protestant thinking from Roman Catholic thinking.

They (Protestants) may feel that they understand Scripture correctly, but they don't claim any unique authority as a particular church body, don't claim any infallibility, and don't claim to have a validity that other churches do not have. Because such churches as the RCC do, however, claim all of that, this is why the question of the OP was asked IMO.

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

........Is that just something to say...or is there some particular reason for concluding that he gave it to you and to no one else? Getting a real answer to this fairly straightforward question shouldn't be like pulling teeth, I wouldn't think.

The reason I answered in that fashion is be because I already know that the historical roots of the Catholic Church and the lines of apostolic succession have been demonstrated in these forums countless times. I doubt that you would accept those proofs if I demostrated them once again. So what else am I to say? The answers have been given by Catholics and rejected by protestants. What other answer would you have me give?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I frankly don't understand all the dark speculation on what Cj wrote. He explained on what grounds he was making the comparison. Almost all of us understood it immediately.

Of course, I already addressed my "intent" and made my point abundantly clear. And, of course, all the condensending and disparaging things here have been aimed at me and Protestants, not by me. But could it be, I wonder, that my point actually IS understood - and we see a desire to attack the messenger instead of addressing the point? There was once a day when our rules here in GT stated we were to address the thread and posts, not attack posters.

So what's the reason for needing to find something to get upset over when it wasn't there?

To evade the point?

The comparison was reasonable--as he outlined the basis for it. The churches named claim to be uniquely valid; the great majority of Christian churches, however, do not.

He said nothing in that about any other similarity or possible similarity. In fact, I remember that there was somewhere in which he stated that the are not the same in most other ways. Considering all of that, I'm beginning to wonder just why you insist upon making something out of nothing.

.


..especially when I made that point very, very clear. And never said a disparaging word here about ANY denomination, never denied the claims of ANY denomination, firmly stated that none of these denominations are being insincere or lacking in integrity. Sadly, PERHAPS there may be some felt need to evade points or some anti-mormonism that is being imputed to me, or some some felt need to impugn the poster rather than addressing the post?

As I read this thread, the inpugning is all on the other side. But what should be happening is the RCC and LDS addressing the substantiation for the remarkable self-claims of self exclusively for self exclusively, some argument we all accept as valid. After all, if the "reasoning" is ridiculed or condemned then how can it be defended as evidential and conclusive? What's good for the goose is good for the gandar - and vise versa. And, therefore, it makes good sense to discuss the two denominations that make the same self-claim about this authority and how they got it and the arguments and reasonings they both use: the RCC and LDS. That IS the issue before us: not me (interesting as I am).





.