What IS MATT 16:18 REALLY TEACHING ?

[RileyG]

Specifically, their intercession in various miracles and blessings, and also the prayers they make for us. For example, when we are baptized, we receive a guardian angel, who seeks to keep us in the faith and strengthen our faith, as well as helping to protect us temporally. This is in accordance with the economy of salvation instituted by God, which is inherently synergistic rather than monergistic.

It is my understanding that every human being, baptized or not, has a guardian angel?

It is also my understanding that receiving the guardian angel is part of the EO mysteries?

 

[ozso]

There really isn’t any substantial difference between the two in terms of Patristic theology. Specifically, any Catholic doctrine also adhered to by the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox and the Assyrian churches, many of which are also adhered to by traditional liturgical Protestants such as Anglicans and Lutherans, can be regarded as Biblical.

It is only the relatively small number of Roman Catholic doctrines which originated in the Scholastic era or are Modernistic, for example, the new position of the Catholic Church on homosexuality outlined in the disastrous “Fiducia Supplicans” which has caused such distress for my Traditional Catholic friends still reeling from the attempted suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass communities instituted by Pope Francis when he somehow revoked Summorum Pontificum issued by Pope Benedict XVI and Ecclesia Dei issued by Pope St. John Paul II, an action which I suspect is a violation of canon law, and issued the rather unpleasant Traditiones Custodes.

Actually of all of the encyclicals, bulls and other writings of Pope Francis, starting with Amoris Laetitia, I cannot find one of them that I agree with in any way, whereas I agree with most of what Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI did.

The ongoing claim in this and many threads like it, is that there was a Pope from the very beginning of the church. Mariology from the very beginning of the church. Praying to souls of the dead and to the angels in heaven from the very beginning of the church. But I've yet to see that actually substantiated. If you want to provide any substantiation, please keep in mind that it's supposed to be from the very beginning of the church. Not from centuries later.

 

[RileyG]

The ongoing claim in this and many threads like it, is that there was a Pope from the very beginning of the church. Mariology from the very beginning of the church. Praying to souls of the dead and the angels in heaven from the very beginning of the church. But I've yet to see that actually substantiated. If you want to provide any substantiation, please keep in mind that it's supposed to be from the very beginning of the church. Not centuries thereafter.

Theology develops over time. It is later defined and defended. All Christian denominations do it.

 

[ozso]

Specifically, their intercession in various miracles and blessings, and also the prayers they make for us. For example, when we are baptized, we receive a guardian angel, who seeks to keep us in the faith and strengthen our faith, as well as helping to protect us temporally. This is in accordance with the economy of salvation instituted by God, which is inherently synergistic rather than monergistic.

Where/when is that written?

 

[ozso]

Theology develops over time. It is later defined and defended. All Christian denominations do it.

Yes but the claim I keep hearing is that the Pope, Mariology and praying to the souls of the dead and to angels, existed in the church from the very beginning. Also theology and doctrine that doesn't have strong and extensive scriptural evidence that's not eisegesis to back it up tends to be flawed, heterodox and heresy.

 

[RileyG]

Yes but the claim I keep hearing is that the Pope, Mariology and praying to the souls of the dead and to angels, existed in the church from the very beginning. Also theology and doctrine that doesn't have strong and extensive scriptural evidence that's not eisegesis to back it up tends to be flawed, heterodox and heresy.

...so which Church is "pure" from your words, "flawed, heterodox, and heresy" in your opinion?

 

[ozso]

...so which Church is "pure" from your words, "flawed, heterodox, and heresy" in your opinion?

I'd say that depends on the theology and or doctrine being taught. A church can be in error regarding one or a few things, but correct regarding everything else, especially that which is primarily essential to Christianity.

 

[One God and Father of All]

How?

Don’t waste your breath. Either the scripture contains Al that is needed to save a person or it doesn't.. The RCC says it doesn’t.. I say it does. The scripture is inspired by God to teach men how they may be saved. The RCC doesn’t believe that. So don’t waste your breath.

 

[RileyG]

Don’t waste your breath. Either the scripture contains Al that is needed to save a person or it doesn't.. The RCC says it doesn’t.. I say it does. The scripture is inspired by God to teach men how they may be saved. The RCC doesn’t believe that. So don’t waste your breath.

Where did you get your scripture from? That's the question.

Also, you seem to put an emphasis on "being saved" a one time event. Where does scripture say that?

 

[One God and Father of All]

Where did you get your scripture from? That's the question.

Also, you seem to put an emphasis on "being saved" a one time event. Where does scripture say that?

The scripture comes from God. If it doesn’t than there’s no sense in defending it. “Being saved“ means one is not saved until he is. Being saved is like someone who is on the road to salvation like being in a race. Some finish the race and some don’t.

 

[RileyG]

The scripture comes from God. If it doesn’t than there’s no sense in defending it. “Being saved“ means one is not saved until he is. Being saved is like someone who is on the road to salvation like being in a race. Some finish the race and some don’t.

Thanks for answering.

 

[The Liturgist]

I'd say that depends on the theology and or doctrine being taught. A church can be in error regarding one or a few things, but correct regarding everything else, especially that which is primarily essential to Christianity.

I know of no dogmatic errors in the Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox churches, and also among some Continuing Anglicans and Traditional Methodists, and likewise have a very high regard for the more conservative Old Catholics (churches that broke communion with Rome over Vatican I’s dogmatization of papal supremacy), the Traditional Latin Mass Catholics, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Confessional Lutherans. Basically, there are a number of churches which are at or very close to a state of doctrinal correctness, and much of my focus is on establishing ecumenical relations between them.

I also particularly like our friend @RileyG as I feel he has expressed a view sympathetic towards my efforts, and our friend @MarkRohfrietsch who has championed the Traditional Theology forum as a meeting place for members of the traditional, liturgical churches.

 

[One God and Father of All]

Thanks for answering.

Does the scripture contain the information necessary to save someone?

 

[RileyG]

Does the scripture contain the information necessary to save someone?

Yes.

 

[The Liturgist]

Yes but the claim I keep hearing is that the Pope, Mariology and praying to the souls of the dead and to angels, existed in the church from the very beginning.

Well we find some of them in many of the oldest surviving liturgies, for example, the Divine Liturgy of St. Cyril, or St. Mark, which is the oldest surviving liturgy in continual use, with minor textual variants.

Regarding the Blessed Virgin Mary, the veneration of her was regarded as orthodox by St. Epiphanius of Salamis, writing in the late fourth century, even as he opposed the inappropriate worship of her by the Collyridians and the failure to venerate her by the Antidicomarians in his encyclopedia of ancient heretical sects, the Panarion, which I can furnish you an English translation thereof. It makes for very illuminating reading.

The worship of Mary has, based on that document, been regarded as heretical for the same length of time that the refusal to venerate her has been objected to. The position of St. Epiphanius remains the official position of the Roman church to this day, as well as the Orthodox and most other traditional churches.

Her status as Theotokos was well accepted at the same time, except in the Church of Antioch; when Nestorius was made Patriarch of Constantinople he attempted to suppress the veneration of St. Mary as Theotokos and instead insisted she be referred to as Christotokos, but this created a grave problem with Christology as it effectively denied the unity of the divine and human natures of Christ in the incarnation, calling into question His status as God incarnate, as Theanthropos, which is clearly scripturally correct (see John 1:1-14) and consequently Nestorius was anathematized by St. Cyril of Alexandria and indeed even Patriarch John I of Antioch would consent to this with his anathema and the dogmatic status of St. Mary as Theotokos being recognized at the Third Ecumenical Council in Ephesus in 433 AD.

 

[The Liturgist]

Being saved is like someone who is on the road to salvation like being in a race. Some finish the race and some don’t.

This is true and most traditional churches aside from the more monergistic ones, such as those adhering to Calvinism, agree with it.

 

[The Liturgist]

Where/when is that written?

Since there is quite a lot to unpack there, I would suggest you post a thread in St
Basil’s Hall in The Ancient Way forum, where the Eastern Orthodox answer questions concerning traditional theology (they also have a forum where people can debate them, which is quite generous), or alternately I can furnish you with a reading list.

You will get a more detailed answer from asking in St. Basil’s Hall. Several of the more knowledgeable Eastern Orthodox members only post in The Ancient Way. Another website used to have Eastern Orthodox forums, but it was very badly run by a defrocked priest who had joined a schismatic Old Calendarist sect that I have persistently had trouble with, and so for the Eastern Orthodox community Christian Forums effectively hosts the only remaining conventional forum for them (of course, there are social networking sites but many people, myself included, dislike using those as forums).

 

[One God and Father of All]

Yes.

If the scripture contains the information necessary to be saved why would you deny sola scriptura?

 

[RileyG]

If the scripture contains the information necessary to be saved why would you deny sola scriptura?

...because it's not the fullness of the truth. And it's anti-biblical if you really look at it.

 

[One God and Father of All]

...because it's not the fullness of the truth. And it's anti-biblical if you really look at it.

I don’t understand, you agreed that the scripture contains the information enough for a person to be saved, but now you say it’s not the fullness of truth. If I could be saved by what the scripture says, what else would matter? To be saved is what Christian’s hope for. Any thing after that is just gravy.