Perfection

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Isn't that mainly used by the EOC? Does the RCC study those?
Sorry, but there is no way I would read thru those.
Forgive me.....

Canons of the seven ecumenical councils - Table of Contents - IntraText CT
Canons of the seven ecumenical councils

Introduction:

In the church discipline, the work of the first four ecumenical councils has an obvious interest for the knowledge of the law and institutions of early Christianity. During this period, 325 to 451, which great patristic follow — through the canonical legislation of the Councils of Nicea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon as well as other decisions made by these assemblies on specific questions — the evolution of the structures of the Church, of her discipline, and of her relations with the surrounding society. If we compare this and the period, we see that all sorts of new problems come up while others importance.

The canons issued by these councils constitute the core of Church Law in the Christian East, even today. They also formed an important part of the Western Church's law during the first influenced, in no small way, the western medieval synthesis.

But you do know something about them. That they were called when problems arose that needed correction. Such as Arius saying Christ is not God. Etc.

Lots of people have no exposure to them at all and fail to realize that we are continuing discussions of things that have been worked out before.

Lots of people carry baggage from some Ancient heretical teachers such as Augustines early errors.

Forgive me...

 

[hedrick]

Isn't that mainly used by the EOC? Does the RCC study those?

Yes. The first four go through Chalcedon.
The 5th was primarily about Theodore of Mopsuestia.
The 6th repudiated monothelitism.
The 7th ended a period of iconoclasm by affirming the veneration of icons.

Catholic and EO accept all 7. Catholics accept a number of later councils as ecumenical, but since they only involved the West, the East doesn't consider them ecumenical.

Protestant attitudes are complex, because the whole role of councils and creeds is controversial. Most Protestants accept the creeds of Nicea and Chalcedon. Probably most accept the major teachings of all 4.
Protestants often don't look beyond the 4. I'd guess that conservative Protestants would accept 5 and 6, but probably not 7. Personally I don't accept 5 or 7, but in general accept 6. I consider 5 a lynching. I even have questions about whether Nestorius was treated fairly by 3, though Nestorianism as condemned was certainly a problem.

 

[Yarddog]

We need to make the effort to be perfect. The Lord will help us.

If God makes you perfect through baptism, what effort do you need to make to become anymore perfect?

What we need to do after receiving God's Holy Spirit, is to learn to walk in that Spirit. We do that through surrendering and humbling ourselves and not by trying to become more perfect through our own works.

 

[dreadnought]

If God makes you perfect through baptism, what effort do you need to make to become anymore perfect?

What we need to do after receiving God's Holy Spirit, is to learn to walk in that Spirit. We do that through surrendering and humbling ourselves and not by trying to become more perfect through our own works.

My experience is that it takes a lot of effort to be perfect.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yes. The first four go through Chalcedon.
The 5th was primarily about Theodore of Mopsuestia.
The 6th repudiated monothelitism.
The 7th ended a period of iconoclasm by affirming the veneration of icons.

Catholic and EO accept all 7. Catholics accept a number of later councils as ecumenical, but since they only involved the West, the East doesn't consider them ecumenical.

Protestant attitudes are complex, because the whole role of councils and creeds is controversial. Most Protestants accept the creeds of Nicea and Chalcedon. Probably most accept the major teachings of all 4.
Protestants often don't look beyond the 4. I'd guess that conservative Protestants would accept 5 and 6, but probably not 7. Personally I don't accept 5 or 7, but in general accept 6. I consider 5 a lynching. I even have questions about whether Nestorius was treated fairly by 3, though Nestorianism as condemned was certainly a problem.

Thank you for that very informative post dear friend.
Until I came across this thread, I had little idea how controversial Christian perfection is, and after read more history on it, I can see why. I will probably have to withdraw from this thread as it really is not an area I have studied, tho I may post now and again. God bless

Christian Perfection as an Ecumenical Doctrine

Consider this passage from T. A. Noble’s book Holy Trinity: Holy People: The Theology of Christian Perfecting:

To begin with, it is necessary to remember that there have been fanatics throughout the history of the church who have claimed absolute “perfection.” We do not have to search too far to find examples of unbalanced extremists who claimed to be “sinless,” and clearly that claim has to be rejected. Wesley had to dismiss two of his preachers, Maxfield and Bell, who made such exaggerated claims.


And yet that does not account for some of the greatest teachers of mainstream Christianity — Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius writing about Antony, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, Cassian and Benedict, Bernard of Clairvaux, Thomas Aquinas, the Pietists Arndt and Spener, and the great evangelist John Wesley — who all gave measured teaching on Christian “perfection.”


But also, and most importantly, it is essential to note that the biblical writers and these great teachers of the church through the centuries were working with a somewhat different understanding of the word “perfection.” None of them ever taught “sinless perfection” — the idea that within this life, Christians could reach that final, absolute state of perfection where they were sinless and perfectly holy. Unfortunately, that is the idea our English word “perfect” conveys, a perfection of “zero defects.” But these great teachers of Christianity were working with the biblical concept of perfection, which is rather different. It works essentially not just with a negative understanding of “perfection” as merely the absence of sin, but primarily with a positive understanding of “perfection” as a fullness of love.”

 

[Winken]

Winken,

Does any Christian history after the close of scripture up to the present fit into your studies? Have you studied about any of the known Christian heresies?

For instance have you studied the first ecumenical councils canons?

Its not a trap. Just an honest question. Maybe they don't pertain to you?

Forgive me...

I study scripture under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit. I do not study commentaries.

 

[Wordkeeper]

Thank you for that very informative post dear friend.
Until I came across this thread, I had little idea how controversial Christian perfection is, and after read more history on it, I can see why. I will probably have to withdraw from this thread as it really is not an area I have studied, tho I may post now and again. God bless

Christian Perfection as an Ecumenical Doctrine

Consider this passage from T. A. Noble’s book Holy Trinity: Holy People: The Theology of Christian Perfecting:

To begin with, it is necessary to remember that there have been fanatics throughout the history of the church who have claimed absolute “perfection.” We do not have to search too far to find examples of unbalanced extremists who claimed to be “sinless,” and clearly that claim has to be rejected. Wesley had to dismiss two of his preachers, Maxfield and Bell, who made such exaggerated claims.


And yet that does not account for some of the greatest teachers of mainstream Christianity — Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius writing about Antony, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, Cassian and Benedict, Bernard of Clairvaux, Thomas Aquinas, the Pietists Arndt and Spener, and the great evangelist John Wesley — who all gave measured teaching on Christian “perfection.”


But also, and most importantly, it is essential to note that the biblical writers and these great teachers of the church through the centuries were working with a somewhat different understanding of the word “perfection.” None of them ever taught “sinless perfection” — the idea that within this life, Christians could reach that final, absolute state of perfection where they were sinless and perfectly holy. Unfortunately, that is the idea our English word “perfect” conveys, a perfection of “zero defects.” But these great teachers of Christianity were working with the biblical concept of perfection, which is rather different. It works essentially not just with a negative understanding of “perfection” as merely the absence of sin, but primarily with a positive understanding of “perfection” as a fullness of love.”

That's the problem with the grammatical historical hermeneutical method used by systematic theologians. How do you ensure you have the right historical context, ensure you are not committing an anachronistic error? Patterns are easier to preserve.

Keep in mind one thing.

Before the cross there was never a possibility of being completed.

Hebrews 11:39-40
39These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, 40since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

This is because transition can never occur if the transited destination does not exist.

The cross created the destination.

Hebrews 4:8
8For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.

Rest is possible if one reaches the destination. No one had reached or led others to the destination before the Cross. It didn't exist.

Also remember all God's promises must be related. Abraham's justification, Joshua's entry into the Promised Land must all be connected with the promise that God's people would be a blessing to the world.

 

[Yarddog]

My experience is that it takes a lot of effort to be perfect.

Are you Jewish? They tried for over a thousands years and failed. Stop trying so hard and begin trusting in Jesus.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

I study scripture under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit. I do not study commentaries.

Roger that.

Forgive me...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I study scripture under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit. I do not study commentaries.

How do you know a lot of them didn't write commentaries under tutelage of the HS?
But the caveat to those reading them, discern whether it is from God or Man, Spiritual or Carnal and of course I read them and the Bible thru the tutelage of the HS...

2 Timothy 2:15
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world,
and not according to Christ.
Hebrews 5:14
Solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.

Kindgdom Bible Studies Lambs Book of Life Part 1

THE BOOK OF THE LIFE OF THE LAMB

Now, what is meant by this term – THE BOOK OF THE LIFE OF THE LAMB? The wise man said, "...of the making of many books there is no end..." (Eccl. 12:12).

The book stores are filled to overflowing today with all types of books dealing with every aspect of earthly life.
Even in the church world there are books setting forth every kind of viewpoint relating to God, the Bible, doctrine, Christian experience, and church order. However the subject material of most of these books largely contains a message of religious tradition and spiritual death.
But God is also producing a book – a book containing a message of life. For the past two millenniums God, by His Holy Spirit, has been writing portions of this Book in the minds and hearts of His people................

 

[dreadnought]

Are you Jewish? They tried for over a thousands years and failed. Stop trying so hard and begin trusting in Jesus.

No, I am not Jewish. One needs to resist the temptation to sin.

 

[Winken]

How do you know a lot of them didn't write commentaries under tutelage of the HS?

The Bible tells me so. Commentaries are, generally speaking, products of human reasoning, including
hypotheticals; God did not ask the commentator to write in order for us to comprehend Scripture.

2 Timothy 2:15
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

Precisely. We are only able to rightly divide aside from human reasoning / tradition.

Even in the church world there are books setting forth every kind of viewpoint relating to God, the Bible, doctrine, Christian experience, and church order. However the subject material of most of these books largely contains a message of religious tradition and spiritual death. But God is also producing a book – a book containing a message of life. For the past two millenniums God, by His Holy Spirit, has been writing portions of this Book in the minds and hearts of His people................

Yes. "Religious tradition." God completed His writing of the Bible with the Book of Revelation. Nothing must be added to the Bible by commentators.

 

[Yarddog]

No, I am not Jewish. One needs to resist the temptation to sin.

Let go of your need to be responsible for your own salvation. Jesus died for all of your sins. Embrace the bloody cross and allow God to take away the desires which cause sin.

That is our only way to truly change.

 

[dreadnought]

Let go of your need to be responsible for your own salvation. Jesus died for all of your sins. Embrace the bloody cross and allow God to take away the desires which cause sin.

That is our only way to truly change.

No, it's important that we resist the temptation to sin. Jesus made that clear enough, didn't he?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

My experience is that it takes a lot of effort to be perfect.

I suppose to some it can.

Are you Jewish? They tried for over a thousands years and failed. Stop trying so hard and begin trusting in Jesus.

The Jews are still awaiting on *their own King, Savior and Redeemer.
However, I believe more and more Jews [and Muslims] will come to the light of Christ.

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

LUKE 16:29
"Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' "
JOHN 5:45
"Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you — Moses, in whom you trust.

2 Corin 3:
13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. [Revelation 21:4]
14 But their minds were hardened;
for until this very day, upon the reading of the Old Covenant, the same veil remains unlifted,
because it is removed in Christ.

Revelation 1:1
An un-covering/un-veiling/apo-kalupsis <602> of Jesus Christ, which gives to Him, the GOD, to show to the bond-servants of Him, which-things is binding to be becoming In/en <1722> Swiftness/tacei <5034>.

Rev 21:4
“And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain,
for the former things[OC?] have passed away.”

There are some Jewish scholars that recommend Jews read the Christian NT/NC. Amen!

What Jews Can Learn from the New Testament | My Jewish Learning

It is daunting to think of the number of books a Jew “must” read in order to achieve Jewish literacy. With trepidation I suggest yet another volume to add to that list: the New Testament (NT).

Almost all of the books of the NT were written by Jews, many of them during one of the most eventful periods of Jewish history: just before and just after the destruction of the Second Temple (in 70 C.E.).
Very few Jewish writings from that century survive, and none by the rabbis, the representatives of what soon became normative Judaism, since the rabbis of that period felt that their teachings had to remain oral (a position they eventually abandoned). So really the only surviving religious books written by Jews in the first and second centuries are a few of the later Dead Sea Scrolls and the NT.

 

[Yarddog]

No, it's important that we resist the temptation to sin. Jesus made that clear enough, didn't he?

Take the apple, then, and enjoy.

 

[Yarddog]

I suppose to some it can.
The Jews are still awaiting on our own King, Savior and Redeemer.
However, I believe more and more Jews [and Muslims] will come to the light of Christ.

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

LUKE 16:29
"Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' "
JOHN 5:45
"Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you — Moses, in whom you trust.

2 Corin 3:
13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. [Revelation 21:4]
14 But their minds were hardened;
for until this very day, upon the reading of the Old Covenant, the same veil remains unlifted,
because it is removed in Christ.

Revelation 1:1
An un-covering/un-veiling/apo-kalupsis <602> of Jesus Christ, which gives to Him, the GOD, to show to the bond-servants of Him, which-things is binding to be becoming In/en <1722> Swiftness/tacei <5034>.

Rev 21:4
“And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain,
for the former things[OC?] have passed away.”

There are some Jewish scholars that recommend Jews read the Christian NT/NC. Amen!

What Jews Can Learn from the New Testament | My Jewish Learning

It is daunting to think of the number of books a Jew “must” read in order to achieve Jewish literacy. With trepidation I suggest yet another volume to add to that list: the New Testament (NT).

Almost all of the books of the NT were written by Jews, many of them during one of the most eventful periods of Jewish history: just before and just after the destruction of the Second Temple (in 70 C.E.).
Very few Jewish writings from that century survive, and none by the rabbis, the representatives of what soon became normative Judaism, since the rabbis of that period felt that their teachings had to remain oral (a position they eventually abandoned). So really the only surviving religious books written by Jews in the first and second centuries are a few of the later Dead Sea Scrolls and the NT.

2023

 

[psif]

I didn't quote wiki in post 109...........
Sorry for the confusion......

Perfection


.

No worries

 

[psif]

On target.

Forgive me...

God bless.

 

[JESUS=G.O.A.T]

Repent just in case? How does one repent of something he doesnt believe he is doing? Unless you are saying that to repent is to just utter the words " I Repent"

Simple you say God forgive of anything I might have done wrong. and God will reveal things to you maybe you offended someone or ignored someone that needed your help etc. or maybe it turns out you didn't do anything wrong... at least you checked. The Lord's Prayer itself includes this method of seeking forgiveness.