My Spritual Pilgrimage - an Update

.....but it is not the case...I would think the muscular debate pro and cons is an opportunity for all to hone their apologetics skills.....:1_grouphug:

 

Again, rehearsing the mantra of the papists the orthodox runs headlong into the fallicous idea that because one protestant group differ in a particular area of theology that there is this great "schism" between us. My fellowship with my Presbyterian brethren isn't based on our understanding of the mode of baptism, but in the Father and in the Son. My fellowship with my Pentecostal brethren doesn't rest in whether I believe the gift of tongues is for today or not, but in the Father and the Son. And we all, to a large degree, believe one is justified by Faith Alone, in Christ Alone, by Grace Alone. The doctrine of justification, as Luther said, is where the Church stand or falls. It is upon this doctrine both the papacy and orthodoxy have fallen.

I began to bring information to answer your questions here, but I first have one. If I take the time to answer, will you accept it? By this I mean, if the information I could provide is biblical and based on sound reason, are you willing to accept it over the opinions of your church?

There is one Church indeed, but not militant. The Apostles of our Lord Jesus did not teach us the Kingdom of God that way. There will be wheat and tares unto the end of this age., then comes the harvest. Why do you see the fleshly pen and messenger and not the Giver and Spirit? Both the prophets and apostles God used to pen Holy Scripture. They are His words, and not theirs, and therefore the Bible was given to His people by God and beart His authority. You are greatly confusing the office of elder and teacher and prophet and apostle with the authority God meant only to His Word. Inasmuch as elder and bishop and church council depart from the Scriptures, but that much they are in error. The Scriptures are judge of these things.

And as it concerns the personal conscience of all men, it is by Scripture they owe submission and obedience. I will not answer to you or church council on the day of judgement. God will not hold me accountable to your church's or a teacher's interpretation of Scripture, but to Scripture itself. And so you will be judged also.

An so-called infaillble confederacy may be as wicked and skewed as a so-called infallible pope. So-called Christian Tradition stands or falls upon Scripture.

You ought not promote the interpretation of men to the place of Scripture. Your Tradition is not God-breathed.

By making your Traditions equal to Scripture you repeat the error of the papists. And like the Pharisees of old hold to your Tradition and set at nought the Word of God. Why should anyone who can read their Bibles not believe that such woes are toward the Orthodox and the Papists as they were against those to whom Christ spoke regarding Jewish Tradition?

As for me, in the famous words of the reformer, "My conscience is held captive to the Word of God." And I would add, I WILL NOT submit it to another authority, for do so would be to me treason and adultery against my God, and is "neither safe nor right."

 

But how does that work, though? Who gets to interpret? Whom should I believe - the Arminian or the Calvinist etc? All of these groups say "Scripture says....therefore..." Which one's right and how can you tell?

 

Agnus,

Can't you read a few pages of Bible for yourself?

Just read Romans 3,4,5,6 for yourself without looking at others.

Words of God is alive, Bible is the Words of God. Bible truth is alive anc will convict you if you read it.

Read the Bible Isaiah, it will change your mind about all the excuses for the Idolatry.

You need a deep meditation instead of superficial argument.

Please read the Bible and try to hear the voice sounding in your heart as there is a voice which can be heard only when you are humble enough.

 

Angus,

I can answer your questions (the ones that be questions, its hard to tell which ones are questions and which ones are challenges) but I am confused about something.

In your OP I got the impression that you were exploring the Orthodox church, yet you take a position as if you are "all in" with them, if you will allow me to use the phrase. If you are committed to that sect then why write the OP as though you were on the outside looking in?

Did I misunderstand your OP?

RB

 

Question for Agnus_Dei coming to a Baptist board to announce the joy of wanting to become a Roman Catholic and then Orthodox Catholic ---"what motivates you"??

Why do you choose what you choose?

What makes one denomination more attractive than another to you?

As for coming here to make a case for the Orthodox Catholic view - or any doctrinal POV -- don't you think that you would have to make your case "Sola Scriptura" on a Baptist Board?? If not - What is "the other way" to do it?

in Christ,

Bob

 

HP: I know how some on the list might answer. “Which ever creates the strongest desire.” That does have a nice ‘philosophical aurora’ to it, now doesn’t it?

 

Simply breathtaking! Sign me up!!

 

You are joking right?

 

I think this question got missed....

Angus,

I can answer your questions (the ones that be questions, its hard to tell which ones are questions and which ones are challenges) but I am confused about something.

In your OP I got the impression that you were exploring the Orthodox church, yet you take a position as if you are "all in" with them, if you will allow me to use the phrase. If you are committed to that sect then why write the OP as though you were on the outside looking in?

Did I misunderstand your OP?

RB
__________________

 

Ok, I just had the impression you were thinking about this sect and not pursuing full communion. I understand now.

 

Because I find it to be doctrinally correct - true to scripture, exegetically the best doctrinal view of what God has said in His Word.

And I have cultivated a "Love of the Truth" for Christ IS the "WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE" John 14.

Not even ONCE do you mention anything about questioning doctrine for yourself - then studying scripture and finding the IFG doctrines to be correct, pure and true to scripture!

Not even ONCE!!

I have known a few IFB members in the past and they seemed to have had more concern for believing what the Bible SAID than for "attending the church organization that they thought had the right lineage".

I found that BEFORE the ECFs of the 3rd through 7th centuries there was the ECF of the FIRST century! The NT writers!

Why not value THEM??!!!

I beg to differ. I do not "confess orthodoxy" I confess faith in Christ and acceptance of the Word of God. NEVER do I conduct a Bible study and support even ONE doctrinal statement with a "because this is orthodoxy" argument!

No not even ONCE! Because that argument is "nothing at all"!

If the Greek Orthodox Catholic church rejects persecution of the saints and prayers to the dead and accepts the trinity and the Bible as the Word of God establishing all faith and doctrine on a "sola scriptura" basis then praise God for their faith in those areas. But that is not WHY I believe those doctrines -- I do not study the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church to "learn what to believe".

in Christ,

Bob

 

While there is much to be remarked upon here, a few things of note. Have you not read how the Aposlte told the elders that after his departure grievous wolves would arise AMONG them, not sparing the flock? It was to be within the first and earliest years of the Christian church that heretics would rise up within. And how do I, who live 2,000 years removed from those days, not having Paul or Peter or John, or another Apostle know who they are and if their treaching is the Word of God or not? What you tell me is that I should trust them...the Orthodox church. The papist say, Nay! but trust in our Tradition, for Peter is the Rock upon which Christ has built His Church!

So I look to God and ask, "Where Lord?" "To the Law and to the Testimony" and "If any man speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in him." God's own word is my light and confidence. His Law and judgements, precepts, and commandments, are my delight.

I have listened to your story, evaluated its argument and teaching, but listened for what you are testifying of. I do not hear the testimony of Christ. I do not hear an abiding trust in the Saviour. What I do hear is the testimony of a sect. I hear an abiding trust in a sect. I hear a Sola Ecclesia.

Now that may be hard for an Orthodox person to hear. But that is the "gospel" you have preached to me. Maybe others see something different. But I hear you preaching your church.

As for me and my house, we will preach Christ and Him crucified.

 

Error Agnus - the point of fact remains - you gave no argument regarding your IFB history about having checked into the doctrinal views and finding them pure and YET this IS the practice of IFB members themselvs. One has to question your history in the IFB when you do not claim to have taken that basic step.

The point remains.

Secondly - you can not counter the clear glaring fact that you DO not claim to have actually done your "homework" while a member of the IFB -- with the wild extreme claim that the ECF views DID NOT CHANGE over the centuries!!

Going from position of error to further position of error is not helping your case here.

in Christ,

Bob

 

I'll stick with scripture while you vacillate from one ECF to the next and then try to pretend that we find no evolution in their doctrine over the centuries.

Give me the Bible over that vacillating model you have chosen. As Paul said of the ECF groups to follow him "I know that AFTER my departure grevious wovles will come in not sparing the flock -- these men will arise FROM AMONG your own selves.."

in Christ,

Bob