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

[calluna]

They are very clear and everything you said about them is completely false.

So are we to believe, then, that the EOC leadership, that very recently jointly declared that the papacy was the only remaining bar to unity with Rome, teaches justification by faith? Rome would be interested to know that, I'm sure.

 

[Albion]

They are very clear and everything you said about them is completely false.

Well, that sure cleared up every possible doubt and settled everything once and for all.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

That's my point. The EOC does not go out of its way to make its teaching clear.[/size]

Actually, we do, if we feel that 1. the person inquiring is genuine in their inquiry and 2. said person is capable of understanding the answer(s).

In your case, we've two reasons not to reply- as evidenced by your flagrant misrepresentations of our understanding of salvation, for example.

 

[Albion]

I'm always suspicious of a religion that is afraid of receiving inquiries from non-members and refuses to or is unable to explain what it believes. I won't throw in the names of any cults at this point, but we all know those that come to mind.

 

[Thekla]

There is plenty of information available online; if earnestly interested, questions can also be more fully answered.

http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/index.html

(use the link to Articles, where there are headings that will link to a list of online articles for each subject heading)

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

Maybe you should go back and reread the entire OP.

Several dozens of polemical responses- yeah, I'll get right on that

I believe you know that the answer for any faith is not that simple.

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

Not even going to try to guess?

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

Didn't say it was a life-changing question/discussion. If it bores you, feel free to ignore the thread.

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

So, my question is upon what do you base this belief? How do you know this to be the truth?

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

Should I list the scriptures? Toard what end? We've done so numerous times, and we are told we are misrepresenting or misinterpreting the scriptures.
Agree to disagree, I say.

That's not what Josiah does and you know that.

No, I don't know that. It is in fact the very clear and simple reading of his constant parallels between Rome and LDS (and now us- praise God) that leads one to see intent.

 

[Albion]

No, I don't know that. It is in fact the very clear and simple reading of his constant parallels between Rome and LDS (and now us- praise God) that leads one to see intent.

The "intent" was to compare these churches with regard to ONE characteristic, not that everything about them is identical. Most of us got that the first time around.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

I'm always suspicious of a religion that is afraid of receiving inquiries from non-members and refuses to or is unable to explain what it believes. I won't throw in the names of any cults at this point, but we all know those that come to mind.

Ahh, so we're a cult.

Again, the genuineness and openness of inquiry has a lot to do with the qualty of answer- or even willingness to do so.

TAW is a great place for serious inquirers. GT is a good place to endure polemics.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

The "intent" was to compare these churches with regard to ONE characteristic, not that everything about them is identical. Most of us got that the first time around.

Sure.

In one way, Protestant churches are very simila to the Gnostics. Is that statement ok, then?

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

I thought the question was about the EO and RC. Now I am thinking it was really asked of the EO and RC (meaning, its members here).

They're not going to go beyond the pet words you asked not to be used, you know. They never do, which I think is because they aren't able to. It confuses them when we push into "What does that really mean to you?" territory.

Ahh, the unbridled condescension. Like religious Stepford Wives, we only repeat what we've been programmed to believe. But Rome is only like LDS in ONE dimension, right Albion?

SERIOUS inquirerers can be directed to our respective fora, OBOB and TAW, where it is fruitful to dialogue- as opposed to GT, where the above post is one of several common types of heckling, condescension, demagoguery, and the like which one finds propogated by the bored, the ignorant, and the self-righteous. Or in some cases, all of the above.

Yet, even in the midst of this vast wasteland- to borrow a phrase from TS Eliot- are genuine, humble, thoughtful Protestants and seekers who ask in order to learn. You know, of course, who you are.

 

[calluna]

Yet, even in the midst of this vast wasteland- to borrow a phrase from TS Eliot- are genuine, humble, thoughtful Protestants and seekers who ask in order to learn. You know, of course, who you are.

This could be a reference to Protestants who do not know much theology and will not ask difficult questions.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Best I can tell he believes that the fact that they both claim authority means that both claims are equally invalid. No?

No,

I NEVER said that ANYONE's or ANYTHING's claims are "invalid." You know that. We all do.

I have said nothing whatsoever disparaging about the RCC (or LDS or any other denomination, for that matter, in any post in this thread). There have been smears toward Protestants by others, but I have offered none toward any.

What I have addressed is ONE and ONLY ONE issue: HOW the remarkable claims of ONE for ONESELF are "substantiated" - by the claims of the self same. Yes, the process is pretty much the same in the RCC as in the LDS, but that, per se, doesn't mean the LDS is THEREFORE wrong - just because it uses the same totally circular reasoning that the RCC does - or vise versa. I simply addressed the circular reasoning. SELF (alone) is saying that SELF (alone) was so authorized - fill in "self" with RCC or LDS or JW or whatever. Again, does that make it false? Of course not - nor did I state or remotely imply that it did.

I'd rather we speak of the "authentication" or "substantiation" the RCC and LDS give for their own remarkable self-claims of self alone for self alone rather than your comments about me. I'm sure I'm a fasinating guy, but I'm not the topic here.





.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

The "intent" was to compare these churches with regard to ONE characteristic, not that everything about them is identical. Most of us got that the first time around.

... I think all did.





.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

This could be a reference to Protestants who do not know much theology and will not ask difficult questions.

Or to those who claim to know plenty about theology and about other faith traditions- and are not interested in asking questions, but rather, pontificating.

 

[Albion]

Ahh, so we're a cult.

Did I forget to include an inordinate defensiveness is characteristic of some of these churches? I didn't say you are a cult.

TAW is a great place for serious inquirers. GT is a good place to endure polemics.

Now...I DO know for a fact that I made mention of that obsession with educating the rest of us.

Since we are not members of the church in question, we can't possibly know anything, right?

 

[Thekla]

The "intent" was to compare these churches with regard to ONE characteristic, not that everything about them is identical. Most of us got that the first time around.

Anything with an organizing principle can be said to share some characteristics with other things with an organizing principle.

 

[Thekla]

Ahh, so we're a cult.[/qutoe]
Did I forget to include an inordinate defensiveness is characteristic of some of these churches?


Now...I DO know for a fact that I made mention of that obsession with educating the rest of us.

Since we are not members of the church in question, we can't possibly know anything, but at the same time it's also assumed that we really must be yearning to know!

I do think its fair to ask whether one asks out of a serious interest or a sort of "idle curiosity".

 

[calluna]

Or

Ah.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

TAW is a great place for serious inquirers. GT is a good place to endure polemics.

Do we have to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4ZgVRJ-H8U&feature=related

 

[Albion]

In one way, Protestant churches are very simila to the Gnostics. Is that statement ok, then?

Could be. But you haven't said in what way you think they are simila. If you make your case as Josiah did his, we'll consider it. Josiah clearly explained the way that the LDS and the EO or RC are similar.

That's why the rest of us knew perfectly well that he wasn't saying what you assumed.